• =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= (18/18) Feb 02 2011 (This must have been discussed before, but I couldn't come up with a way...
• =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= (11/27) Feb 02 2011 Oy! :( I meant the above only in the array-wise semantics. Both of these...
• bearophile (5/7) Feb 02 2011 I have some unfinished ideas here, please add your comments :-)
• =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= (3/13) Feb 02 2011 Thanks bearophile! I was thinking about you when I was typing my message...

=?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:

(This must have been discussed before, but I couldn't come up with a way 
to search in the archives.)

There is a hidden danger with two uses of slices:

     double[] slice1 = [ 1, 1, 1];
     double[] slice2 = [ 2, 2, 2];
     double[] slice3 = [ 3, 3, 3];

     slice2 = slice1;              // (1)
     slice3[] = slice1;            // (2)

The last two lines mean very different things:

   (1) start sharing elements with slice1

   (2) copy slice1's elements

If either gets used by accident, the difference may not be noticed until 
the elements are modified in the future.

Could we limit the syntax to reduce the chances of such a risk? e.g. 
"When two slices are involved, both sides must use the array-wise 
syntax". Then the second line had to be written as:

     slice3[] = slice1[];

Ali

=?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:

Ali Çehreli wrote:
 (This must have been discussed before, but I couldn't come up with a way
 to search in the archives.)

 There is a hidden danger with two uses of slices:

     double[] slice1 = [ 1, 1, 1];
     double[] slice2 = [ 2, 2, 2];
     double[] slice3 = [ 3, 3, 3];

     slice2 = slice1;              // (1)
     slice3[] = slice1;            // (2)

 The last two lines mean very different things:

   (1) start sharing elements with slice1

   (2) copy slice1's elements

 If either gets used by accident, the difference may not be noticed until
 the elements are modified in the future.

 Could we limit the syntax to reduce the chances of such a risk? e.g.
 "When two slices are involved, both sides must use the array-wise
 syntax".

Oy! :( I meant the above only in the array-wise semantics. Both of these 
should be valid with their different meanings:

     slice2 = slice1;
     slice3[] = slice1[];

This is still ok:

     slice2 = slice1[];   // a slice to "all of" slice1

This should be illegal:

     slice3[] = slice1;

Should it be?

Ali

bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Ali Çehreli:

 (This must have been discussed before, but I couldn't come up with a way 
 to search in the archives.)

I have some unfinished ideas here, please add your comments :-)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3971

Bye,
bearophile

=?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:

bearophile wrote:
 Ali Çehreli:
 
 (This must have been discussed before, but I couldn't come up with a way 
 to search in the archives.)

 
 I have some unfinished ideas here, please add your comments :-)
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3971
 
 Bye,
 bearophile

Thanks bearophile! I was thinking about you when I was typing my message. ;)

Ali