[Issue 9423] Missed conversion of lambda literal with ref argument

[d-bugmail--- via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9423

Paul Backus  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 CC||snarwin+bugzi...@gmail.com
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #5 from Paul Backus  ---
Closing in favor of 11316, since that one covers all storage classes, not just
ref.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 11316 ***

--

[Issue 9423] Missed conversion of lambda literal with ref argument

[d-bugmail--- via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9423

Iain Buclaw  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P2  |P4

--

[Issue 9423] Missed conversion of lambda literal with ref argument

[d-bugmail--- via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9423

--- Comment #4 from Mathias LANG  ---
*** Issue 12830 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***

--

[Issue 9423] Missed conversion of lambda literal with ref argument

[via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9423

Vladimir Panteleev  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://issues.dlang.org/sh
   ||ow_bug.cgi?id=10602

--

[Issue 9423] Missed conversion of lambda literal with ref argument

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9423



--- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-30 10:26:15 PST ---
A discussion thread, the answers are mixed:

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mixmakdqfmaznmmni...@forum.dlang.org


A comment from Timon Gehr:

 BTW, the pull does not contain a test for the case
 
 void foo(int delegate(int) dg){ ... } // 1
 void foo(int delegate(ref int) dg){ ... } // 2
 
 void main(){ foo(x=0); } // call 1

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 9423] Missed conversion of lambda literal with ref argument

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9423


Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||pull
   Platform|x86 |All
 OS/Version|Windows |All
   Severity|normal  |enhancement


--- Comment #1 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2013-01-29 09:23:54 PST ---
When I fixed bug7705, I decided that lambda inference does not infer parameter
storage classes. Instead, users should specify `ref`/`out`/`lazy` explicitly.

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/809/files#L1R496

Because, explicit specifying of `ref` in call site is sometimes required in
newsgroup.

void foo(ref int x) {}
int n;
foo(ref n);   // not allowed in today

So, current behavior is intended. You should write it as follows:

void foo(int delegate(ref int[1]) spam) {}
void main() {
foo((ref x) = 0); // OK
}

However, I cannot say clearly whether it's right behavior.
I think that the opinion parameter storage classes should be inferred is also
worth.

Therefore, I'll mark this as 'enhancement'.

=

A pull to implement this feature:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1580

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 9423] Missed conversion of lambda literal with ref argument

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9423



--- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-29 10:00:15 PST ---
(In reply to comment #1)

 Therefore, I'll mark this as 'enhancement'.
 
 =
 
 A pull to implement this feature:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1580

Thank you Hara.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---