dip25 implementation
Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu Aug 6 14:18:13 PDT 2015
On 8/6/15 4:11 PM, Xiaoxi wrote:
> On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 19:55:20 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On 8/4/15 4:54 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>> How complete is the dip25 implementation?
>>>
>>> For example, should this be expected to be an error?
>>>
>>> struct S
>>> {
>>> int[5] x;
>>> auto foo() { return x[];}
>>> }
>>>
>>> I'll note, that dmd 2.067.0 with -dip25 considered this an error, head
>>> does not. Adding a 'return' to the foo attributes fixes it in 2.067,
>>> but...
>>>
>>> auto getS()
>>> {
>>> S s;
>>> return s.foo();
>>> }
>>>
>>> does not error in either version, even with the return attribute.
>>
>> Anyone? Is this a bug or not?
>>
>
> why is it related to dip25? slices uses pointers not ref?
I think it's because the 'this' is implicitly ref. If dip25 just throws
its hands up on slicing, it has a problem I think.
In any case, 2.067 complained about it with -dip25, and didn't without,
so it seems related.
-Steve
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list