http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5715
Summary: Contradiction in spec: meaning of variable.init
Product: D
Version: D1 & D2
Platform: All
URL: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/property.html#init
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Keywords: spec
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: websites
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: s...@iname.com
Blocks: 677
--- Comment #0 from Stewart Gordon <s...@iname.com> 2011-03-07 06:58:04 PST ---
"If applied to a variable or field, it is the default initializer for that
variable or field. For example:
int a;
int b = 1;
typedef int t = 2;
t c;
t d = cast(t)3;
int.init // is 0
a.init // is 0
b.init // is 0
t.init // is 2
c.init // is 2
d.init // is 2"
According to the prose, b.init == 1. But this claims it is 0. Similarly with
d.
I recall the semantics being changed at some point from the initial value of
the variable to that of its type. This matches the examples, but not what the
statement actually says. Possible rewrite of that paragraph:
".init produces a constant expression that is the default initializer. If
applied to a type, it is the default initializer for that type. If applied to a
variable, it is the default initializer for the variable's type. If applied to
a field, it is the default initializer for that field. For example:"
Moreover, is the meaning for a field meant to apply only to type.field
constructions, or to object.field constructions as well?
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
