www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 6922] New: [TDPL] superimposing of const and immutable does not work correctly

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922

           Summary: [TDPL] superimposing of const and immutable does not
                    work correctly
           Product: D
           Version: D2
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
        ReportedBy: timon.gehr gmx.ch



From TDPL, p. 299:
"When two qualifiers are superimposed, D uses simple composition rules. If the
qualifiers are identical, they are collapsed into one. Otherwise,
const(immutable(T)) and immutable(const(T)) are both collapsed into
immutable(T) because that is the most informative type."


However, with DMD 2.056:

static assert(is(immutable(const(T)) == immutable(T)));        // fail.
static assert(is(const(immutable(T)) == immutable(const(T)))); // fail.
static assert(is(const(immutable(T)) == immutable(T)));        // fail.

All three assertions should pass.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 09 2011
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922


Kenji Hara <k.hara.pg gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bugzilla kyllingen.net



*** Issue 6338 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 10 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922


Kenji Hara <k.hara.pg gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |patch, rejects-valid



https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/505

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 10 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922




From discussion in https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/505

1. inout + const of T should parse [1a] const(T) or [1b] inout(T)?
2. or introduce new combined qualifier inout(const(T))? (see bug 6930)

Current my patch have selected [1a] as the result.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 10 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922






 From discussion in https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/505
 
 1. inout + const of T should parse [1a] const(T) or [1b] inout(T)?
 2. or introduce new combined qualifier inout(const(T))? (see bug 6930)
 
 Current my patch have selected [1a] as the result.



Parsing it as inout(T) or parsing it as const(T) is both wrong (and any of the
two are an arbitrary choice).

The 'definition' of inout is that it is whatever qualifier is on the input
argument.

Consider the type

inout(const(T))

We can now make a case distinction:

1. inout == mutable   => inout(const(T)) == const(T)
2. inout == const     => inout(const(T)) == const(const(T)) == const(T)
3. inout == immutable => inout(const(T)) == immutable(const(T)) == immutable(T)

Option 1. does not support the 3rd case, therefore it is wrong.
Option 2. works as expected, therefore it is correct.

I do not think there is a choice. (adding unnecessary special cases is the way
to make a language ugly and complicated, see C++)

If you disagree, with what part of the explanation do you disagree?

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 10 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922






 If you disagree, with what part of the explanation do you disagree?


No, I don't disagree your explanation. My only argument is that is *debatable*
thing.

OK. I'll change my patch to make the combination of inout and const ambiguous
(== keep current behavior) in order to make room for improvement.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 10 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922








 If you disagree, with what part of the explanation do you disagree?


 
 No, I don't disagree your explanation. My only argument is that is *debatable*
 thing.


Apparently it is. :o)


 
 OK. I'll change my patch to make the combination of inout and const ambiguous
 (== keep current behavior) in order to make room for improvement.


Thank you.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 10 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922


Walter Bright <bugzilla digitalmars.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |bugzilla digitalmars.com
         Resolution|                            |FIXED



20:04:36 PST ---
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/b8ec4cf0e44ca069de5df33bde37639ab8281c8d

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 14 2011
prev sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6922




*** Issue 6855 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Dec 11 2011