DMD 1.032 and 2.016 releases

[Koroskin Denis]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:58:19 +0400, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> wrote:

> "Koroskin Denis" <2korden at gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:op.ud24ipehenyajd at proton.creatstudio.intranet...
>> On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 02:56:29 +0400, Walter Bright
>> <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>>> Clearly this function isn't valid for all types if T can't be a static
>>>> array type.
>>>
>>> Right.
>>>
>>> Andrei has also pointed out that this lack of consistency is a problem
>>> and should be fixed, but at the moment, that's the way it is.
>>
>> The same goes for Tuple. Honestly, I don't see a reason why tuples can't
>> be returned.
>> And since Tuple!(char,char,char,char) is no different from char[4],
>> I think that static arrays should also be allowed as a return type.
>
> The problem with returning static arrays is that they live on the stack.
> Function goes out of scope, bye bye array. Or are you suggesting that the
> static array be automatically .dup()ed?
>
>

I expect that a bitwise copy returned. Just like with structs.
What's the difference between char[2] and struct { char[2]; }?