On Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 05:50:03 UTC, Profile Anaysis
wrote:
It is inconsistent with dynamic arrays and mixing them creates
a mess in the order of indices.
I best someone was asleep at the wheel when programming the
code for static arrays. (probably someone different than who
programmed the dynamic arrays)
This is a bug IMO.(unfortunately one that can't be fixed ;/)
No, there's no inconsistence and there's no bug. Shorten things
down a bit:
```
auto x = new int[][](3,4);
auto y = new int[3][](4);
writefln("%s, %s", x[0].length, y[0].length);
```
This will print 4, 3. Why?
auto a = int[](4);
In this case, a is an array of int. The allocation makes space
for 4 values of type int.
auto b = int[][](4);
Here, b is an array of int[]. The allocation makes space for
values of type int[].
The following are the equivalent declarations for static arrays:
auto c = int[4];
auto d = int[][4];
In other words int[][4] is the static equivalent of new
int[][](4).
Following from that:
auto e = new int[][](4, 3);
This creates an array of 4 values of type int[], each of which is
an array that holds 3 values of type int. The static equivalent:
auto f = int[3][4];
So based on that, you should be able to see that the problem is
not in the implementation of static arrays in D, but a mismatch
in your declarations.
auto x = new int[][][][](1,2,3,4);
auto y = new int[1][2][][](3,4); // Does not match declaration of
x
To get what you want, change the declaration of x:
auto x = new int[][][][](4, 3, 2, 1);
