Type inference and overloaded functions

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Monday, December 09, 2013 22:59:49 Ali Çehreli wrote:
> On 12/09/2013 10:52 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 07:47:38 FreeSlave wrote:
> >> I just found weird D behavior about inference of array types.
> >> 
> >> Let's suppose we have these overloaded functions:
> >> 
> >> import std.stdio;
> >> 
> >> void bar(const(int[3]) arr)
> >> {
> >> 
> >>       writeln("static array");
> >> 
> >> }
> >> 
> >> void bar(const(int[]) arr)
> >> {
> >> 
> >>       writeln("array slice");
> >> 
> >> }
> >> 
> >> // In main we have something like that:
> >> int main(string[] args)
> >> {
> >> 
> >>       bar([1,2,3]);
> >>       writeln(typeof([1,2,3]).stringof);
> >>       return 0;
> >> 
> >> }
> >> 
> >> Weird thing is that the static array version of bar is called,
> >> but typeof().stringof is int[], not int[3].
> > 
> > Array literals are always dynamic arrays. int[3] is a static array.
> > 
> > - Jonathan M Davis
> 
> The original question is valid then: [1,2,3] goes to the static array
> overload.

Then AFAIK, that's a bug. The type of array literals is always a dynamic 
array, so they should match dynamic array overloads rather than static array 
overloads, or if they match both due to an implicit conversion, there should 
be an ambiguity error. Choosing the static array overload over the dynamic one 
is just plain wrong.

- Jonathan M Davis