a struct as an multidimensional array index

[Ali Çehreli]

On 6/10/22 08:13, z wrote:

 > arrays of arrays has different order for declaration and addressing,
 > and declaring array of arrays has different order depending on how you
 > declare it and wether it's static or dynamic array, *oof*)
 >
 > To give you an idea of the situation :
 > ```D
 >      int[3][1] a;//one array of 3 int
 >      writeln(a[0][2]);//first "column", third "row"
 > ```

I've written about this multiple times in the past but D's way is 
consistent for me. That must be because I always found C's syntax to be 
very illogical on this. To me, C's problem starts with putting the 
variable name in the middle:

   // C code:
   int a[1][3]; // Why?

So, first, D moves the variable to its consistent place: after the type:

   int i;
   int[N] arr;

Both of those are in the form of "type and then name". Good...

And then, here is the consistency with arrays: "type and then square 
brackets".

   int[] dynamicArray;
   int[N] staticArray;

So, here is where you and I differ:

   int[3][1] arr;  // Ali likes
   int[1][3] arr;  // z wants

I like it because it is consistently "type and then square brackets". 
(It so happens that the type of each element is int[N] in this case.) If 
it were the other way, than array syntax would be inconsistent with 
itself. :) Or, we would have to accept that it is inside-out like in C.

But of course I understand how it is seen as consistent from C's point 
of view. :)

And this is consistent with static vs dynamic as well because again it's 
"type and then square brackets":

   int[1][] a;  // A dynamic array of int[1]
   int[][3] b;  // A static array of 3 int[]s

Ali