string literal string and immutable(char)* overload ambiguity
Steven Schveighoffer
schveiguy at gmail.com
Tue Jul 31 15:07:04 UTC 2018
On 7/31/18 10:13 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
> is there any particular reason why
>
> void foo(string a) {}
> void foo(immutable(char)* b) {}
>
> void bar()
> {
> foo("baz");
> }
>
> result in
>
> Error: foo called with argument types (string) matches both:
> foo(string a)
> and:
> foo(immutable(char)* b)
>
> especially given the pointer overload is almost always
> void foo(immutable(char)* b)
> {
> foo(b[0 .. strlen(b)]);
> }
> and if I really want to call the pointer variant I can with
> foo("baz".ptr);
> but I can't call the string overload with a literal without creating a
> temp.
>
> I think we should make string literals prefer string arguments.
>
Absolutely, I didn't realize this was an ambiguity. It should be the
same as foo(long) vs. foo(int) with foo(1).
-Steve
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list