dmd 1.046 and 2.031 releases

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Robert Jacques wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 21:21:47 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu 
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
> 
>> Robert Jacques wrote:
>>> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:48:50 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu 
>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert Jacques wrote:
>>>>>>> long g;
>>>>>>> g = e + f;  => d = cast(long) e + cast(long) f;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Works today.
>>>>>  Wrong. I just tested this and what happens today is:
>>>>> g = cast(long)(e+f);
>>>>> And this is (I think) correct behavior according to the new rules 
>>>>> and not a bug. In the new rules int is special, in this suggestion, 
>>>>> it's not.
>>>>
>>>> I think this is a good idea that would improve things. I think, 
>>>> however, it would be troublesome to implement because expressions 
>>>> are typed bottom-up. The need here is to "teleport" type information 
>>>> from the assignment node to the addition node, which is downwards. 
>>>> And I'm not sure how this would generalize to other operators beyond 
>>>> "=".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>  Hmm... why can't multiple expressions be built simultaneously and 
>>> then the best chosen once the assignment/function call/etc is 
>>> reached? This would also have the benifet of paving the way for 
>>> polysemous values & expressions.
>>
>> Anything can be done... in infinite time with infinite resources. :o)
>>
>> Andrei
> 
> :) Well, weren't polysemous expressions already in the pipeline somewhere?

I'm afraid they didn't get wings. We have incidentally found different 
ways to address the issues they were supposed to address.

Andrei