http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5115
--- Comment #9 from Kenji Hara 2011-11-10 23:11:38 PST ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> scoped!Foo() returns a temporary of type scoped!(Foo).Scoped (or something
> like
> that).
> This temporary is implicitly converted to Foo using alias this,
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5115
--- Comment #9 from Kenji Hara 2011-11-10 23:11:38 PST ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> scoped!Foo() returns a temporary of type scoped!(Foo).Scoped (or something
> like
> that).
> This temporary is implicitly converted to Foo using alias this,
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5311
Kenji Hara changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Platform|Other
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6790
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Sternberg 2011-11-10
16:18:31 PST ---
As of dmd 2.056, this now throws "core.exception.OutOfMemoryError". No
recompilation was needed, but recompilation resulted in the same thing.
This is probably some error in d
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #14 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2011-11-10 13:58:05 PST ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > (In reply to comment #11)
> > > You may be misunderstanding me. I agree this is a bug. I'll try to be
> > > clearer:
>
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #13 from Steven Schveighoffer 2011-11-10
13:41:52 PST ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > You may be misunderstanding me. I agree this is a bug. I'll try to be
> > clearer:
> >
> > 1. inout(const(T)) sh
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #12 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2011-11-10 13:33:33 PST ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > (In reply to comment #9)
> > > inout's primary focus is transferring the type modifier from the
> > > arguments to
> >
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #11 from Steven Schveighoffer 2011-11-10
13:22:28 PST ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > inout's primary focus is transferring the type modifier from the arguments
> > to
> > the return type. Merging it
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #10 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2011-11-10 13:12:29 PST ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > (In reply to comment #6)
> > > I think this issue is an enhancement.
> >
> > I strongly disagree. What qualifies it as an
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922
--- Comment #6 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2011-11-10 13:14:59 PST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > If you disagree, with what part of the explanation do you disagree?
>
> No, I don't disagree your explanation. My only arg
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922
--- Comment #5 from Kenji Hara 2011-11-10 13:10:16 PST ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> If you disagree, with what part of the explanation do you disagree?
No, I don't disagree your explanation. My only argument is that is *debatable*
thing.
OK
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922
--- Comment #4 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2011-11-10 12:57:55 PST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> From discussion in https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/505
>
> 1. inout + const of T should parse [1a] const(T) or [1b] inout(T)?
> 2. o
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #9 from Steven Schveighoffer 2011-11-10
12:50:44 PST ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > I think this issue is an enhancement.
>
> I strongly disagree. What qualifies it as an enhancement for you?
It *is*
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922
--- Comment #3 from Kenji Hara 2011-11-10 12:48:18 PST ---
>From discussion in https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/505
1. inout + const of T should parse [1a] const(T) or [1b] inout(T)?
2. or introduce new combined qualifier ino
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #8 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2011-11-10 12:39:59 PST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I think this issue is an enhancement.
I strongly disagree. What qualifies it as an enhancement for you?
>
> With current dmd implementation, the resu
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #7 from Steven Schveighoffer 2011-11-10
12:38:04 PST ---
What it does is allow you to return data that is immutable, but is not part of
the input, and still have it be immutable after inout is resolved.
The example given isn't qui
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
Kenji Hara changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #6 from Kenji Har
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #5 from Kenji Hara 2011-11-10 11:59:36 PST ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> inout(const(int[])) foo(inout(int[]) x){
> import std.random;
> bool condition = cast(bool)uniform(0,2);
> return condition ? x : new immutable(in
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #4 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2011-11-10 11:42:45 PST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> So let my try to understand what inout(const(T)) actually means.
>
> If inout resolves to mutable or const, this becomes const(T)
> If inout resolves t
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
Steven Schveighoffer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||k.hara...@gmail.com
--- Comment
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
--- Comment #2 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2011-11-10 11:16:41 PST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I'm not seeing a good use case here.
>
> Can't you just do:
>
> return condition ? x : new inout(int[])(2);
Is this better?
immutable(int[]) bar(){
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
Steven Schveighoffer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schvei...@yahoo.com
--- Comment
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6930
Summary: combined type of immutable(T) and inout(T) should be
inout(const(T))
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: n
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6929
Summary: [ICE] typeMerge crashes in presence of ambiguous alias
this conversions
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Keyw
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6928
Summary: alias this, immutable and common type fail in presence
of fields with indirections
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6912
--- Comment #6 from Steven Schveighoffer 2011-11-10
06:49:38 PST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > I think this should be accepts-invalid, since the given example code should
> > not
> > compile.
>
> Wow, I'm sorry,
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6912
--- Comment #5 from Kenji Hara 2011-11-10 06:07:48 PST ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I think this should be accepts-invalid, since the given example code should
> not
> compile.
Wow, I'm sorry, and thank you for your fix.
--
Configure issu
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6912
Steven Schveighoffer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|rejects-valid |accepts-invalid
--- Comment #4
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2486
Kenji Hara changed:
What|Removed |Added
Platform|x86 |All
Version|1.037
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922
Kenji Hara changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugzi...@kyllingen.net
--- Comment #1 fro
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922
Kenji Hara changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch, rejects-valid
--- Comment #2 from
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6338
Kenji Hara changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
32 matches
Mail list logo
