On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 09:47:00PM +0200, Daniel Davidson wrote:
> On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 at 21:11:19 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
> >Hmm. I just did a quick-n-dirty change to Phobos, and it seems to
> >make chain() usable with pure code. I'm not sure why the compiler
> >didn't infer pure fo
On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 at 21:11:19 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:09:50PM +0200, Daniel Davidson wrote:
[...]
I reported my issue with the `chain` function to this NG and
tried
to start annotating items used by chain with pure to see how
far the
thread led. Honestly it
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 02:10:02PM -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:09:50PM +0200, Daniel Davidson wrote:
> [...]
> > I reported my issue with the `chain` function to this NG and tried
> > to start annotating items used by chain with pure to see how far the
> > thread led. Hone
On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 14:10:02 H. S. Teoh wrote:
> This is just a hack, of course. The compiler *should* be able to
> correctly infer that the ctor is pure. So the real fix is to find out
> why the compiler isn't doing that.
Because it sucks at attribute inference. The inference that it d
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:09:50PM +0200, Daniel Davidson wrote:
[...]
> I reported my issue with the `chain` function to this NG and tried
> to start annotating items used by chain with pure to see how far the
> thread led. Honestly it was quickly clear that it led too far for me
> to follow it an
On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 at 20:09:51 UTC, Daniel Davidson
wrote:
You and dicebot surely disagree on this practice as he sees no
real reason to ever circumvent the type system.
There are some cases were you have no other options because of
language design limitations but it is something th
object
normally (i.e. mutable), and then later "freeze" it to
immutable via a simple cast or so?
In std.exception there is assumeUnique. It's basically just a
cast, but
might be good enough for you.
Is there any other recourse here?
Why does making `this(...) immutable` f
uot; it to immutable via a simple cast or
so?
In std.exception there is assumeUnique. It's basically just a cast, but
might be good enough for you.
Is there any other recourse here?
Why does making `this(...) immutable` fix things below?
Shouldn't that immutable designation mean no mem
.exception there is assumeUnique. It's basically just a
cast, but
might be good enough for you.
Is there any other recourse here?
Why does making `this(...) immutable` fix things below?
Shouldn't that immutable designation mean no members of this will
be modified? But that is t
On Wednesday, 9 October 2013 at 16:02:43 UTC, Daniel Davidson
wrote:
Maybe this will help explain it:
void main() {
pragma(msg, typeof(Bar.name));
pragma(msg, typeof(Foo.change));
}
will print:
immutable(char[][])
void(string[] name)
The latter is really:
void(immutable(char)[] name)
The
On Wednesday, 9 October 2013 at 15:33:23 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
That string is independent from the argument (i.e. Bar.name).
They initially share the same characters. Either of those
strings can leave this sharing at will, and that is exactly
what name="tess" does. 'name' now refers to dif
On Wednesday, 9 October 2013 at 15:46:29 UTC, Gary Willoughby
wrote:
So why does this give me an error i expect:
import std.stdio;
class Foo
{
public void change(string[] name)
{
name[0] = "tess";
D does stripping of qualifiers from top level when creating a
copy which allows to pass immutable stuff as mutable parameter by
value. Adding any single level of immutable indirection will make
this impossible and result in compile-time error.
On Wednesday, 9 October 2013 at 15:33:23 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 10/09/2013 08:26 AM, Gary Willoughby wrote:
Can someone explain why i can change Bar's immutable name
member please?
import std.stdio;
class Foo
{
public void change(string name)
{
name
On Wednesday, 9 October 2013 at 15:26:35 UTC, Gary Willoughby
wrote:
Can someone explain why i can change Bar's immutable name
member please?
import std.stdio;
class Foo
{
public void change(string name)
{
name = "
On 10/09/2013 08:26 AM, Gary Willoughby wrote:
Can someone explain why i can change Bar's immutable name member please?
import std.stdio;
class Foo
{
public void change(string name)
{
name = "tess";
writeln(name);
}
}
Can someone explain why i can change Bar's immutable name member
please?
import std.stdio;
class Foo
{
public void change(string name)
{
name = "tess";
writeln(name);
}
On Thursday, 13 June 2013 at 12:29:57 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 14:17:22 +0200, Stephan Schiffels
wrote:
For example, is there a way of instantiating an object
normally (i.e. mutable), and then later "freeze" it to
immutable via a simple cast or so?
In std.exception th
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 14:17:22 +0200, Stephan Schiffels
wrote:
For example, is there a way of instantiating an object normally (i.e.
mutable), and then later "freeze" it to immutable via a simple cast or
so?
In std.exception there is assumeUnique. It's basically just a cast, but
might be g
Hi,
I have some problems with adopting my code to a breaking change
introduced in version 2.063. Apparently, now it's not anymore
possible to instantiate an immutable object via:
auto object = new immutable(SomeClass)(contructor_args...);
without also defining either
this(constructor_args..
20 matches
Mail list logo
