On Thursday, 23 August 2012 at 22:03:04 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Thursday, August 23, 2012 23:55:10 Philip Daniels wrote:
auto x = [1,2,3];
auto y = x.idup;
y ~= 99; // fine!
y[0] = 99; // "Error: y[0] isn't mutable"
y.clear; // fine!
So idup is returning an "immutable(int)[]" rather than an
"immutable int[]".
I find this a bit surprising. Anybody else?
It's the same thing that slicing does. The result is
tail-const. And since you
can assign it to immutable int[] if you want to, it's more
flexible this way.
It just means that auto gives you a mutable array with
immutable elements
rather than an immutable array. And if you don't want to care
what the type is
but still want it to be full immutable, then just use immutable
rather than
auto:
immutable y = x.idup;
- Jonathan M Davis
Thanks for the explanation Jonathan. Another thing to add to me
cheat sheet of D-isms :-)
