Real implicitly converts to float?

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Thursday, June 23, 2016 04:55:09 Tofu Ninja via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Wednesday, 22 June 2016 at 14:17:42 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > Well, that particular value should probably work thanks to VRP
> > (value range propagation), since 10 can fit into float with no
> > loss of precision. However, what's far more disconcerting is
> > that
> >
> > real x = real.max;
> > float y = x;
> >
> > compiles. real to float is a narrowing conversion, which should
> > be an error barring the compiler detecting that the value will
> > fit in the target type even if it's a narrowing conversion
> > (which only happens with VRP). That's not the sort of thing
> > that I would have expected to be broken such that it begs the
> > question as to whether it's intentional, but given that
> > narrowing conversions without a cast are illegal everywhere
> > else, this definitely seems broken.
> >
> > - Jonathan M Davis
>
> Should I make a bug report? I am not sure it's a bug, seems
> intentional. Maybe a dip for a compiler flag to warn on implicit
> down conversions, but it would be a pretty small dip.

You're original code is almost certainly not a bug thanks to VRP, but I
would think that the example with real.max would be. So, it makes sense to
me to report it. Worst case, it gets closed as invalid. I certainly wouldn't
suggest a DIP for it at this point. If the bug were closed as invalid, then
then a DIP might make sense (though if it were intentional, then I question
that we could get Walter to change it), but I'd treat it as a bug first.

- Jonathan M Davis