On 11/20/2010 05:09 PM, spir wrote:
???
backdoor and s do not denote the same element. One is a mutable array, the other is
immutable. Why should changing backdoor affect s? Whether backdoor and chars denote the
same array depends on whether "=" copies or not dyn arrays. But from immutable
string to mutable array, there must be a copy (read: dup).
Must also be a copy the other way. Secret heap allocations are not fun.
Anyway, the most annoying issue is not about assignments inside a given scope,
but parameter passing (including implicit ones like in Andrei's example of
foreach).
void f (char[] chars) {}
void g (string str) {}
...
string str = "abc";
char[] chars = "abc".dup;
f(str);
g(chars);
__trials__.d(30): Error: function __trials__.f (char[] chars) is not callable
using argument types (string)
__trials__.d(31): Error: function __trials__.g (string str) is not callable
using argument types (char[])
...
f(str.dup); // ok
g(chars.idup); // ditto
I do not understand the alternative.
By the way, why isn't the definition of string immutable(char[]), instead of
immutable(char)[]?
string s = "abc";
s = "bde"; // fails with immutable(char[]), rightly so.
