On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 04:18:18 UTC, ed wrote:
On Thursday, 13 March 2014 at 18:17:03 UTC, Chris Williams
wrote:
On Thursday, 13 March 2014 at 03:31:09 UTC, ed wrote:
On Thursday, 13 March 2014 at 00:15:19 UTC, Chris Williams
wrote:
[snip]
It shouldn't and probably isn't working.
It is working and in fact it is in a "const pure @safe"
function. So I will trust it :-)
Well it's like a broken watch being correct twice a day. The
correct result doesn't mean that something is working.
But this is perfectly valid and safe D code, is it not?
long[4] a=[1,2,3,4];
int[2][2] b = a.to!(int[]);
which is no different to this:
int[] a_int = a.to!(int[]);
int[2][2] b = a_int;
Am I missing something here?
Thanks,
ed
Looking at the disassembly I'm convinced the code is benign and
valid D. It just goes through the D runtime which does the full
array bounds checking.
As to whether or not this should work:
int[4] a=[1,2,3,4];
int[2][2] b;
b=a;
is up to the D language gurus. I think it should... but I'm no
language developer, there may be other side-effects I haven't
thought about.
Cheers,
ed
