[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

[d-bugmail at puremagic.com]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135



--- Comment #3 from Kenji Hara <k.hara.pg at gmail.com> 2011-12-31 01:01:24 PST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I think (and perhaps I'm wrong) that the signature with ... and the one without
> must be equivalent. The ... makes a difference only in the call syntax, but in
> fact still passes an array. (Note that the variadics ending with "T[] param..."
> are not unsafe C-style variadics.) Please advise - thanks!

Hmm, current compiler always raise an error against the difference of variadic
argument kind (non-variarics vs typesafe-variadics vs C-style variadics).

But, from http://d-programming-language.org/abi.html

> The variadic part is converted to a dynamic array and the rest is the same as for non-variadic functions.

So, in ABI layer, (..., T[]) and (..., T[]...) might be same...

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