On Sunday, 5 May 2013 at 19:34:34 UTC, Igor Stepanov wrote:
Hello, I've two simple questions:
1. I have a structure:
struct Foo
{
public int bar() const {return 0;}
public int bar() immutable {return 1;}
}
How can I get immutable bar address?
When I've wrote next code I've got a const bar address. Is it a
bug?
void main()
{
immutable Foo boo;
int delegate() immutable dg = &boo.bar;
}
Yes. First, the immutable keyword before dg don't do what you
think in D. Right now this is an hole in the type
system/spec/implementation (pick one). But boo being immutable it
should return the immutable delegate anyway. So you have two bugs
in one. Congrat !
Hopefully, I've been able to discuss this with Andrei at DConf,
who agreed on the problem and we were able to discuss solutions.
Next question:
If I write ัััะต code, it'll be builded successfully
void main()
{
foreach(cur; __traits(getOverloads, Foo, "bar"))
{
void* p = &cur;
writeln(cur); //prints a function pointer.
}
}
If I change protection of bar to export I've got a error:
struct Foo
{
export int bar() const {return 0;}
export int bar() immutable {return 1;}
}
void main()
{
foreach(cur; __traits(getOverloads, Foo, "bar"))
{
void* p = &cur; //Error: need 'this' to access member
bar
writeln(cur);
}
}
How should it be?
The method aren't static, so you should need this all the time. I
can understand both behavior, but it is clearly inconsistent. We
should pick one and stick to it.