On 10/3/20 4:46 PM, Daniel Kozak wrote:
On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Daniel Kozak <kozz...@gmail.com
<mailto:kozz...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I would say it is here you just need to read it carefully:
https://dlang.org/spec/struct.html#static_struct_init
For case specification is change I will paste it here:
'''
If a StructInitializer is supplied, the fields are initialized by the
StructMemberInitializer syntax. StructMemberInitializers with the
Identifier : NonVoidInitializer syntax may be appear in any order, where
Identifier is the field identifier. StructMemberInitializers with the
NonVoidInitializer syntax appear in the lexical order of the fields in
the StructDeclaration.
'''
And StructMemberInitializer is defined as:
'''
StructMemberInitializer:
NonVoidInitializer
Identifier : NonVoidInitializer
'''
And NonVoidInitializer is defined as:
'''
NonVoidInitializer:
ExpInitializer
ArrayInitializer
StructInitializer
'''
And as you can see there is ArrayInitializer
And there is definition of Array literals here
https://dlang.org/spec/expression.html#array_literals
and in section 2. there is this text:
'''
By default, an array literal is typed as a dynamic array, but the
element count is known at compile time. So all array literals can be
implicitly converted to static array types.
'''
"StructMemberInitializers with the NonVoidInitializer syntax appear in
the lexical order of the fields in the StructDeclaration" seems to
suggest it will not call the constructor, but instead initialize the
fields according to the list.
The fields are not a static array, so clearly it is calling the
constructor, and not initializing the fields.
I really don't think this case is in the spec.
But I know it works, for instance:
Variant v = anything;
If this required an explicit Variant constructor, it would be quite
annoying.
-Steve
