[Issue 9240] (Regression: 2.058) non-const does not implicitly convert to const

2013-01-12 Thread d-bugmail 
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9240



--- Comment #1 from Andrej Mitrovic  2013-01-12 
19:32:48 PST ---
Introduced by:

commit d3cd1bf6db3689fb16c8f97572ae8bbf92ec9df7
Author: k-hara 
Date:   Tue Dec 13 15:03:44 2011 +0900

Issue 4251 - Hole in the const system: immutable(T)[] implicitly casts to
ref const(T)[]

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 9240] (Regression: 2.058) non-const does not implicitly convert to const

2013-01-14 Thread d-bugmail 
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9240


yebblies  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 CC||yebbl...@gmail.com
 Resolution||INVALID


--- Comment #2 from yebblies  2013-01-14 22:33:33 EST ---
This is not a bug.  See the examples in issue 4251 for how allowing this would
break const.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 9240] (Regression: 2.058) non-const does not implicitly convert to const

2013-01-14 Thread d-bugmail 
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9240



--- Comment #3 from Andrej Mitrovic  2013-01-14 
07:43:19 PST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> This is not a bug.  See the examples in issue 4251 for how allowing this would
> break const.

Exact comment which explains this:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4251#c9

I think this could go to the spec as a small note. It was brought up on IRC by
someone converting some C++ code to D, and at first sight it seemed like a
rejects-valid. A few of us agreed and I filed it, but comment #9 above explains
the problem perfectly.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---