www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 297] New: Shadowing declarations allowed in foreach type lists

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=297

           Summary: Shadowing declarations allowed in foreach type lists
           Product: D
           Version: 0.164
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Keywords: accepts-invalid
          Severity: minor
          Priority: P3
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: bugzilla digitalmars.com
        ReportedBy: deewiant gmail.com


void main() {
        int i;
        int[] a;
        foreach (i; a) {}
        foreach (i, n; a) {}

        // this fails, the above don't
        for (int i;;) {}
}

I don't think this should be allowed, but I'm not entirely certain. Foreaches
are, in a way, functions in their own right, passed to the container's opApply,
and shadowing in nested functions or function/delegate literals _is_ allowed.

I just still tend to think of foreach loops as only the better way of writing
for loops, and since you can't do it with for loops you shouldn't be able to do
it with it foreach loops. <g>


--
Aug 20 2006
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=297


bugzilla digitalmars.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED




--
Sep 19 2006
prev sibling parent Thomas Kuehne <thomas-dloop kuehne.cn> writes:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

d-bugmail puremagic.com schrieb am 2006-08-20:

 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=297



 void main() {
         int i;
         int[] a;
         foreach (i; a) {}
         foreach (i, n; a) {}

         // this fails, the above don't
         for (int i;;) {}
 }

 I don't think this should be allowed, but I'm not entirely certain. Foreaches
 are, in a way, functions in their own right, passed to the container's opApply,
 and shadowing in nested functions or function/delegate literals _is_ allowed.

 I just still tend to think of foreach loops as only the better way of writing
 for loops, and since you can't do it with for loops you shouldn't be able to do
 it with it foreach loops. <g>


Added to DStress as
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/f/foreach_37_A.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/f/foreach_37_B.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/f/foreach_37_C.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/f/foreach_37_D.d

Thomas


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFFINYhLK5blCcjpWoRAn3vAJ9i9VvntyfjLU3yDDpaCeqlU5ZA8gCePKZ5
xiQ4maye+EgY+rZgVOL8k+A=
=nr+N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Oct 02 2006