digitalmars.D - Think, this is an error
- M (48/48) Jul 09 2004 char []funk(char [][]s){
-
David Medlock
(15/21)
Jul 09 2004
char []funk(char [][]s){
int M[256];
char []ARRAY[256];
return "";
}
Tends to chrash some times. It crashed about in 1 time of 8. It just crashes, I
cant catch any exceptions.
Actually, it was:
char []funk(char [][]s){
int M[256];
char []ARRAY[256];
my code follows........
}
and it crashes.
Then I put
char []funk(char [][]s){
int M[256];
char []ARRAY[256];
return "";
my code follows........
}
It also crushes.
Thend I put
char []funk(char [][]s){
int M[256];
return "";
char []ARRAY[256];
my code follows........
}
It didn't crash
Then I put
char []ARRAY[256];
char []funk(char [][]s){
int M[256];
return "";
my code follows........
}
it worked, and then I put
char []ARRAY[256];
char []funk(char [][]s){
int M[256];
my code follows........
}
And it worked fine.
I think, that if "char []ARRAY[256];" is inside a function, maybe the garbage
collector misanderstands it. Isnt "char []ARRAY[256];" filled with crap at the
beginning, and if the gbc looks at it, maybe it tries to free random arrays?
M.
Jul 09 2004
M wrote:
char []funk(char [][]s){
int M[256];
char []ARRAY[256];
return "";
}
<snip>
Not sure if it is an error, but this is the only part of syntax that
didn't make sense to me.
The D declaration should be:
char[][256] ARRAY;
(if not plz correct me).
I don't know Walter allows the old C style to work also?
Since D arrays are very un-like C arrays, and C libraries are already
linkable, why allow it?
I realize it is not syntactically ambigious(ie. allowing it doesn't
require any overhead/lookahead) but it just doesn't 'fit' with the rest
of the clean syntax.
Just my .02.
Thanks for the great job as always Walter.
Jul 09 2004








David Medlock <amedlock nospam.org>