Should this work?

[Marco Leise]

Am Fri, 17 Jan 2014 21:38:18 +0100
schrieb Marco Leise <Marco.Leise at gmx.de>:

> Am Mon, 13 Jan 2014 11:40:19 -0000
> schrieb "Regan Heath" <regan at netmail.co.nz>:
> 
> > On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:47:07 -0000, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh at quickfur.ath.cx>  
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 02:14:41AM +1000, Manu wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >> One more, again here to reduce spam...
> > >>
> > >> 2 overloads exist:
> > >> void func(const(char)* str);
> > >> void func(const(char)[] str);
> > >>
> > >> Called with literal string:
> > >> func("literal");
> > >>
> > >> called with argument types (string) matches both.
> > >>
> > >> I appreciate the convenience of the automatic string literal ->
> > >> const(char)* cast. But in this case, surely it should just choose the
> > >> array version of the function, like it does it calling with a 'string'
> > >> variable?  The convenience should be just that, a convenience, not a
> > >> hard rule...?
> > >
> > > File a bug against dmd for this? I agree that it should match the array
> > > overload, not the pointer overload. I'm not sure if it's fixable,
> > > though, due to the way overloads are resolved currently. But maybe Kenji
> > > has a way. ;)
> > 
> > I think this should remain an error, for the same reason as any other  
> > overload resolution error; you might have one, and add the second and  
> > silently behaviour changes - this is bad.
> > 
> > Instead.. isn't the first overload strictly incorrect, unless that first  
> > overload expects a null terminated **UTF-8** string.. if it's a C function  
> > it should be const(ubyte)* str right?  What overload does D select if you  
> > use that instead?
> > 
> > R
> 
> A few days ago I noticed - in shock :D - that I had this
> situation with a \0 terminated D string literal and totally
> expected the char* overload to be chosen!
> 
> I want to object to your claim that C functions should take
> const(ubyte)*. When working in Windows that is correct due to
> the ANSI/Microsoft codepage madness, but on Mac OS X and Linux
> UTF-8 can be assumed.

Then again, technically you can still set any encoding you
like, so my argument is moot and you are correct that
const(ubyte)* should be used in any case.
Heck, even most of Phobos probably passes UTF-8 directly into
OS APIs without converting to the current locale. :p

-- 
Marco