On 3/18/18 2:24 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, March 18, 2018 13:10:28 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 3/18/18 4:34 AM, sdvcn wrote:
dchar v11=dchar.max;
auto vp11 = [v11];
auto v2 = cast(ubyte[]) (vp11); //v2.length=4
auto v22 = cast(ubyte[])( [v11]); //v2.length=1
This seems like a bug to me.
It appears that v22 has truncated v11 to a byte and made only a single
byte array out of it.
Except that that's precisely how you usually get an array any integral type
smaller than an integer. e.g.
auto arr = cast(ubyte[])([1, 2, 3, 4]);
In this case, you could do
ubyte[] arr = [1, 2, 3, 4];
instead, but if you're not dealing with an initializaton or assignment like
this (e.g. you're passing the array to a functon), then the cast is the way
you do it. Normally, you do it with integer literals, and I could see an
argument that it shouldn't allow it without VRP being used to make it work,
but it _is_ a cast, and casts are a bit of a blunt instrument.
So, I really don't think that it's a bug.
It's quite possible that you aren't understanding what is happening:
ubyte[] arr = cast(ubyte[])[555];
writeln(arr); // [43]
Why is this not a bug? I didn't cast the 555 to a ubyte, so it should
either complain that it can't do it, or give me an array of 4 bytes.
I guess it could be explained as the same thing as:
ubyte[] arr = [cast(ubyte)555];
But this is surprisingly weird behavior.
-Steve
