[Issue 7105] relax inout rules

[d-bugmail at puremagic.com]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7105



--- Comment #7 from Stewart Gordon <smjg at iname.com> 2012-02-19 06:37:31 PST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > For example, what would be the meaning of the following declarations?
> > 
> > inout(int)[] delegate(inout(int)[] dg;
> > inout(int)[] foo(inout(int)[]delegate(inout(int)[] dg, inout(int)[] x){ ... }
> 
> Both of these would be syntax errors, because the brackets aren't matched.
> 
> But I see the ambiguity now.  Does the inout status belong to the delegate
> itself or to the function of which it is a parameter?
> 
> If the signature of dg is invalid because it doesn't pass the inout status
> through, then in principle it could be taken to belong to the outer function. 
> Which would be passing the inout status through to the delegate rather than as
> a return.
> 
> I'll think about it and continue the discussion on the newsgroup.

digitalmars.D
"inout and function/delegate parameters"

On web interface:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/jhr0t6$24v6$1@digitalmars.com

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------