On 5/25/22 6:55 AM, user1234 wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 May 2022 at 06:04:10 UTC, frame wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 May 2022 at 05:56:28 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
It's a case where the compiler can't divine what you were thinking
when you wrote that code ;)
I see not in all cases but in mine. If the compiler sees the function
isn't callable without arguments and it is inside an if-statement or
`assert()` then it could at least suggest a pointer or ask: are you
dumb? ;-)
As suggested by others, the reduction is not correct, you have stripped
too muchbecause this compiles just fine:
Yes, he acknowledged that too much was stripped. I also verified similar
code works.
But the real problem was something else. He is saying in this message
"why doesn't the compiler recognize that in comparing a function to
null, I really wanted to compare a function *pointer* to null", but I
don't see how the compiler can make that leap.
Often times, I wish the compiler could just read what I was thinking
when I wrote the code, so it could give me thought-contextual errors but
alas, it can't.
-Steve
