On Wednesday, 14 August 2013 at 18:08:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig
wrote:
On 8/14/13 2:26 PM, Andre Artus wrote:
On Sunday, 11 August 2013 at 17:01:46 UTC, Yota wrote:
On Friday, 9 August 2013 at 17:35:18 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Friday, 9 August 2013 at 15:28:10 UTC, Manfred Nowak
wrote:
michaelc37 wrote:
WTF -> -1 is greater than 7 ????
From the docs:
It is an error to have one operand be signed and the other
unsigned
for a
<, <=, > or >= expression.
-manfred
Interesting. I didn't know it was documented as being an
outright
error, I thought it was just "surprising"...
I don't think Walter will ever accept to make it illegal
though,
breaks too much code. If this was a change he was OK with, I
think we
would have had it since day one, or at least, years ago.
I remember hearing somewhere that D is about enforcing users
to write
CORRECT code. I would really be disappointed with the
language if
this sort of gotcha weren't eliminated.
If I look at this assert, I shouldn't be expecting it to pass.
static assert(-1 > cast(size_t)7);
IMHO, as long as this sort of comparison causes a
compile-time error,
as the docs say they should, this kind of breaking change is
the of
very good sort. The sort that reveals bugs in code. (Like
when they
changed the NULL macro to mean 'nullptr' instead of 0 in
C++.) I
couldn't imagine a programmer exploiting this intentionally,
as it
serves no purpose.
I agree, breaking changes that expose bugs in your code are
the good
kind. The time spent fixing compile time errors is more than
compensated
for by the time saved not having to hunt down those bugs.
Having worked with languages where reference types are
non-nullable by
default I wish more languages did the same.
Which are those languages? I'm interested.
Haskell, there are functions called "null", but they are
[normally] equivalent to "isEmpty". Tri-values and other cases
for null covered by "Maybe"/"Either".
F#, has null to interface with other .NET languages, but only
used on the boundaries. Most other cases for null covered with
"option".
Spec#, when compiling with the "/nn" switch. It's a research
clone of C# with Eiffel-like features (i.e. contracts). You can
cast from a nullable type to a not-null type in which case the
compiler inserts a run-time check. There is also a strict type
annotation "!" forcing not-null semantics even when compiling
without "/nn". Unfortunately it's not being actively maintained
(AFAIK) and has fallen behind on the latest C# features.
http://specsharp.codeplex.com/
I have not used Eiffel, something about the syntax does not
appeal to me [1], but I believe it has the concept of "void
safety" which you can read about here:
http://docs.eiffel.com/book/papers/void-safety-how-eiffel-removes-null-pointer-dereferencing
1. I'm not knocking Eiffel, it has pioneered or promoted many
important innovations in OOP. My view on the syntax is like my
taste in ice-cream: merely a personal opinion.
