On Tuesday, 14 December 2021 at 05:38:17 UTC, Tejas wrote:
On Monday, 13 December 2021 at 22:30:59 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 13 December 2021 at 22:06:45 UTC, chopchop wrote:
If I remove the ref, it works as expected, that is to say I
can give a derived class as parameter.
Why are you using the ref to begin with?
What the logic here?
Consider this:
class C : A {}
void incr(ref A a) {
a = new C;
}
B b = new B;
incr(b);
// oops b now got rebound to a C instead of to a B, which
breaks everything
But `B` is not a child of `A`, why should it be accepted in a
function that accepts `A` as a parameter? It's not implicitly
convertible to `A`
Tejas, I think you should not read Adam's example as standalone,
obviously he is implicitly reusing the definition of B in my
first post, so B is indeed a child of A.
