On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 13:13:22 -0500, ollie <ol...@home.net> wrote:
I am using wchar[] and find the usage clunky. Am I doing something wrong?
Example:
// Compiler complains that wchar[] != immutable(char)[]
wchar[] wstr = "This is a wchar[]";
It's not so much the wchar vs. char, but the mutable vs. immutable. It
could be argued that the message should say "wchar[] != wstring" instead.
This works:
immutable(wchar)[] wstr = "This is a wchar[]";
or
wstring wstr = "This is a wchar[]";
// Compiler accepts this
wchar[] wstr = "This is a wchar[]"w.dup;
Right, because you are duplicating the string onto the heap, and making it
mutable.
// Compiler accepts this
wchar[] wstr;
wstr ~= "This is a wchar[]";
If the compiler knows the type in the last example with concatenation,
shouldn't it be able to figure that out in the first example.
No, because the first example does not involve heap allocation, just
straight assignment.
Appending involves concatenation, and making a copy of the original, so it
is safe to do so.
-Steve
