On Tuesday, 26 February 2013 at 16:57:50 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 February 2013 at 16:28:59 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko
wrote:
Hi!
I have recently experimented with ways to express the exact
instantiated type of a generic struct, and found that I can in
some cases use "this" as that type.
-----
this (ref this) // not a postblit constructor
this (ref this, this f, typeof (this), this, ref this g)
-----
Ivan Kazmenko.
There was a discussion about this recently (wasn't it with
you?) and I believe the conclusion basically boiled down to
"bug: accepts-wrong".
That would be significant change in the language, where it is?
Neither of those two signatures should compile. The fact that
they do is a bug.
If they do compile, it's undefined behavior. From there, you
can't rely on anything.
Certainly this is not undefined behavior because those rely on 2
language rules.
I think there was a bugzilla entry for it, but I'll have to
look for it.
