== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article > On 8/23/11 6:15 AM, foobar wrote: > > == Quote from bearophile (bearophileh...@lycos.com)'s article > >> foobar: > >>> you raise a valid concern but this looks too complicated. > >>> I'd suggest to simplify into only two cases. > >>> > >>> // 1) T.INIT - as you suggested the dimension should be checked > >>> auto foo = new int[][](10, 20); // correct > >>> auto foo1 = new int[][](10); // compilation error > >> Keep in mind that currently this is correct and it generates a 1D dynamic > >> array: > >> auto v = new int[10]; > > > > Isn't this an inconsistency in the language? > > > > // Generally speaking, allocates an instance of T on the heap > > auto foo = new T; > > > > However, "int[10]" and "new int[10]" are different types. > I hate that, too. Walter hates it, too, but we both reckon it's too late > now to change things. It makes it impossible to create an instance of > the type "int[10]" dynamically because of an gratuitous syntactic > special case. It comes from C++, where it was an unforced error. > Andrei
Is it possible to deprecate/disallow "new T[size]" since we have an alternate syntax for it? At least until D3 comes along when we could change this. This also aligns with your goal of moving built-in types from the compiler/runtime to the library (AAs..) which I think is an important goal. I'd like to see dynamic arrays as well as AAs as plain templates in phobos and D itself only provides a thin layer of syntax sugar for literals and such.
