On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:17:50 -0500, Denis Koroskin <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 18:42:16 +0300, Michel Fortin
<[email protected]> wrote:
Consider this case:
int a, b, c;
int[] array;
array ~= [a, b, c];
array ~= toArray(a, b, c);
Does it make sense to heap-allocate the mutable array? Hardly. With the
literal, the compiler is free to optimize away the heap allocation, not
so with toArray.
[a, b, c] could result in a static array. Then there wouldn't even be a
need for toArray, just use more natural int[] arr = [a, b, c].dup; syntax
That would be bad, T[] is implicitly casted from T[N]. Consider that you
could easily escape stack data using this. In other words, the type
system would allow the assignment without the dup.
-Steve
