On Wednesday, 11 December 2013 at 16:28:39 UTC, Chris Cain wrote:
On Wednesday, 11 December 2013 at 09:49:13 UTC, Namespace wrote:
On Wednesday, 11 December 2013 at 04:01:11 UTC, Ali Çehreli
wrote:
On 12/10/2013 04:37 PM, Namespace wrote:
> int[] arr2 = [7, 8, 9]s;
> assert(is(typeof(arr2) == int[3]));
That looks very confusing. The left-hand side looks like a
slice, which I can append elements to but its type is a
static array?
Ali
That is intended (but can be discussed of course). It was
often desired to write int[$] arr = [1, 2, 3]; to
auto-determine the dimension. And my change does something
like that: if you assign a static array to a slice, the
dimension is auto-determined and the type is adapted.
I agree with Ali. arr2 says it's a dynamic array but it's not.
This could easily lead to errors worse than the class caused by
implicit conversions (what's worse than explicitly saying you
want an x but getting a y instead?). `int[$]` for this purpose
would be acceptable, however. I actually like that idea,
personally.
Ok, I will change that. ;)
And I will try to implement the syntax for int[$].
