On Thursday, 4 July 2013 at 13:45:07 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Thursday, 4 July 2013 at 09:24:53 UTC, TommiT wrote:
Yes, you are right in that the quote from TDPL refers to that
specific function signature and is saying that the base type
of T[] and T must match. But more generally, that quote is
also saying that D doesn't try to do implicit conversion and
type deduction at the same time for type-parameterized runtime
arguments. In other words, the quote is saying: the type of
the argument you pass to a templated function must match
exactly to the templated type that the function template is
expecting for that particular argument. That is: no implicit
conversion happens to your variable before it is passed to the
function as a runtime argument whose type is parameterized by
the function.
You heavily misunderstoond the topic.
No I didn't.
The issue here is that in
T[] find(T)(T[] haystack, T needle)
type of neendle should correspond to base type of haystack. If
there is a contradiction ("at the same time implicit
conversions and type deduction"), dmd issues error.
Yes I understand this perfectly. No problem. This works exactly
like it does in C++ and I know C++. Trust me.
Actually if you pass integer static array, dmd deduces T to be
int, [..]
And that right there, "dmd deduces T to be int", is the crux of
the matter. How on earth is DMD able to deduce T to be int,
without using the implicit conversion from int[10] to int[] ?
DMD does the implicit conversion int[10] -> int[] while it is
doing type deduction, which according to TDPL shouldn't happen.
