On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:34:14 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer
<schvei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:16:40 -0500, Robert Jacques <sandf...@jhu.edu>
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:42:45 -0500, Walter Bright
<newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
Currently, the type is determined by the type of the first element and
the rest are implicitly cast to it.
I propose changing it to being the type produced by applying the ?:
logic repeatedly to all the elements.
Given how numeric literals currently work:
vote--
for example currently:
float[] = [1.0f, 2.5, 5.6, 0.8].dup;
under the proposal
float[] = [1.0f, 2.5f, 5.6f, 0.8f].dup;
How about if a cast is sticky? That is, the last detected cast inside
an array literal is applied to subsequent elements that do not have a
cast:
[cast(float)1.0, 2.5, 5.6, 0.8]; // equivalent to [1.0f, 2.5f, 5.6f,
0.8f] => float[]
[cast(float)1.0, 2.5, cast(double)5.6, 0.8]; // equivalent to [1.0f,
2.5f, 5.6, 0.8] => double[]
Nevermind... I guess this already works:
cast(float[])[1.0, 2.5, 5.6, 0.8]
I don't see the OP's point as being an issue in light of this.
-Steve
