"Ben Davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Starting with magic initialisation then...
>
I meant a different magic initialization:
int[int] aa = null;
aa[3] = 7; // aa is magically not null any more
> Is it vital that e[nonexistentKey] throw a RangeError, or could it just
> always return the type's default value if the key is absent?
>
This is what it does.
> If you change that, then you can make assignment evaluate the RHS fully
> before even creating the LHS entry, and you won't in the process break the
> common case where people want to go
>
> count[key]++;
> or
> array[key]~=element;
>
> without worrying about whether it's the first time for that key or not.
>
This problem is just a bug in code generation from what I can tell, because
lowering it manually results in the rhs being evaluated first.
import std.stdio;
int* getp()
{
writeln("1");
return new int;
}
void main()
{
*getp() += { writeln("2"); return 1; }();
}
prints:
2
1
I have no idea where this is happening in the compiler.
