[Issue 2548] Array ops that return value to a new array should work.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2548 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P2 |P4 --
[Issue 2548] Array ops that return value to a new array should work.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2548 Jesse Phillips jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|WONTFIX |--- --- Comment #4 from Jesse Phillips jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com --- Since Damian closed this as fixed due to a different code example, I'm going to reopen as no D developer has said this won't get implemented. --
[Issue 2548] Array ops that return value to a new array should work.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2548 John Colvin john.loughran.col...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||john.loughran.colvin@gmail. ||com Resolution|FIXED |WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from John Colvin john.loughran.col...@gmail.com --- This is a wontfix, not a fixed. Damian's example is different and AFAIK always worked. --
[Issue 2548] Array ops that return value to a new array should work.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2548 Damian damian...@hotmail.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||damian...@hotmail.co.uk Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Damian damian...@hotmail.co.uk --- double[] foo = [1.0,2,3,4,5].dup; double[] bar = [6.0,7,8,9,10].dup; auto baz = foo[] ~ bar[]; This works fine now in 2.065 --
[Issue 2548] Array ops that return value to a new array should work.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2548 s...@iname.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||s...@iname.com Keywords||diagnostic --- Comment #1 from s...@iname.com 2008-12-31 10:24 --- This certainly ought to work. The memory allocation is no more 'hidden' than that involved in concatenation already is. So that isn't really a valid reason. But the error message is poor whether you think it should be allowed or not. --
