• Ant (4/4) May 12 2005 cannot implicitly convert expression ...... of type int to bit
• Derek Parnell (7/12) May 12 2005 No, I don't think so.
• Ant (17/31) May 12 2005 rebooted to linux.
• Peter Mackay (9/11) May 13 2005 I think because it's faster. Otherwise the machine, which deals with int...
• Stewart Gordon (8/16) May 13 2005
• Jarrett Billingsley (3/5) May 13 2005 bit.sizeof is 1, so it's probably represented as a byte.

Ant <Ant_member pathlink.com> writes:

cannot implicitly convert expression ...... of type int to bit

is this new?

Window 2000, dmd 0.123

Ant

Derek Parnell <derek psych.ward> writes:

On Fri, 13 May 2005 03:50:08 +0000 (UTC), Ant wrote:

 cannot implicitly convert expression ...... of type int to bit
 
 is this new?
 
 Window 2000, dmd 0.123

No, I don't think so. 

You can't implicitly convert float to int either.

-- 
Derek
Melbourne, Australia
13/05/2005 2:06:42 PM

Ant <duitoolkit yahoo.ca> writes:

Derek Parnell wrote:
 On Fri, 13 May 2005 03:50:08 +0000 (UTC), Ant wrote:
 
 
cannot implicitly convert expression ...... of type int to bit

is this new?

Window 2000, dmd 0.123

 
 
 No, I don't think so. 
 
 You can't implicitly convert float to int either.
 

rebooted to linux.

it's ok for dmd 0.121 linux
downloading dmd 0.123...installing...ok

still passes on linux dmd 0.123.


from phobos:

class Object
{
     void print();
     char[] toString();
     uint toHash();
     int opCmp(Object o);
     int opEquals(Object o);
}

why does opEquals return an int?

(all my "int to bit" were from "==")

Ant

Peter Mackay <a_pointy_stick.NoJunkMail yahoo.co.uk> writes:

Hello,

 why does opEquals return an int?

I think because it's faster. Otherwise the machine, which deals with int 
sizes well (typically because they're native word sized), would have to 
convert between int and bits all the time.

The int vs bit vs bool argument has been bashed out on the group a lot I 
suspect. It's not how I'd like it either, but I think it's just 'how it is'.

 (all my "int to bit" were from "==")

I get this too, since I usually have functions return a bool for my own 
readability, and have to add a cast manually.

Pete

Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:

Peter Mackay wrote:
 Hello,
 
 why does opEquals return an int?

 
 
 I think because it's faster. Otherwise the machine, which deals with int 
 sizes well (typically because they're native word sized), would have to 
 convert between int and bits all the time.

<snip>

But isn't a single bit (as opposed to a bit array) represented 
internally as an int anyway?

Stewart.

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:d62k80$2fn0$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 But isn't a single bit (as opposed to a bit array) represented internally 
 as an int anyway?

bit.sizeof is 1, so it's probably represented as a byte.