On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 13:44:41 -0500, Michel Fortin
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2010-12-06 13:35:27 -0500, Andrej Mitrovic
<[email protected]> said:
Actually I really like the optional usage of ref here because it might
help to disambiguate between a class and a struct object:
E.g.:
class Foo
{
}
struct Bar
{
}
void main()
{
Foo ref foo; // I can be sure Foo is a class
Bar bar;
}
Sometimes it happens that I forget to 'new' a class object, and to the
naked eye the code doesn't appear wrong, but using the optional ref
keyword helps in tracking this kind of bug down. I guess the compiler
should throw an error in cases where Foo is a struct.
It does (throw an error in cases where Foo is a struct). I never though
of this usage. :-)
Since we're speaking of the optional use of 'ref', here's a little quiz:
alias Object A;
alias Object ref B;
A ref a;
B ref b;
What happens here? Should there be an error somewhere? Where? Also, what
happens if we apply different modifiers at different places?
alias Object ref B should be the same as alias Object B, since Object ref
is the same type as Object.
So there should be no error.
Now, what happens for this:
alias const(Object) ref A;
A ref a;
My gut says this should be the same error as trying to ref a struct. But
I can see it also being allowed.
-Steve
