On Monday, 18 March 2013 at 22:59:58 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 03/18/2013 11:52 PM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Monday, 18 March 2013 at 22:33:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 03/18/2013 10:45 PM, monarch_dodra wrote:
...
ubyte[4096] x = repeat( cast(ubyte)0 )[ 0 .. 4096 ].array();
This can be used as-is inside normal code. Hwoever, array is
not
CTFE-able, so it can't work to define a struct T.init value.
Which is annoying and should be fixed.
Making array work with CTFE is a no-go, as array's job is to
run-time
allocate a new array.
Uh. Its job is to collect a range into an array. Implementation
details are irrelevant.
Yes, you are right. For a few seconds I though that all
allocations were banned in CTFE, but it's actually hand made
allocation that don't work.
Now, if we had "staticArray(R, Sizes)(R)" transforms a range
into an
array whose size is know at compile time, then that's another
story.
It'd be more efficient at run-time, and CTFE-able
Sizes should go first.
Hum, I had meant: "staticArray(R, Sizes...)(R)" in case you
wanted a multidim array.
I'm not 100% sure if putting Sizes... before R mixes well.
1) Do we want such a weird and specific function? Or is that
just
premature optimization? I mean, is there a real need?
Use 'copy'.
Yes, but unfortunately, using 'copy' entails first declaring the
variable, then copying to it, which defeats what we're trying to
achieve.
That said, I investigated array, and just got it to work :) And
it was trivial, so I'll push it.
