• Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= (16/16) Mar 30 2018 Coming from a more Java-esque background, I'm used to sometimes
• ketmar (6/7) Mar 30 2018 yes. default values should be the same for all objects. it is predictabl...
• ketmar (3/3) Mar 30 2018 p.s.: still, it may be nice to warn user about that. 'cause such runtime...
• Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= (5/8) Mar 30 2018 I simply think a word about it in the docs would be nice, since
• ketmar (3/10) Mar 30 2018 please, make an ER in bugzilla then. 'cause it will be lost here, and wi...
• Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= (2/4) Mar 30 2018 Will do.

Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:

Coming from a more Java-esque background, I'm used to sometimes 
initializing class members outside of the constructor :

class MyClass {
     Object member = new Object();
}

I've tried using this in D, but I've come to realize it acts very 
differently. In Java, the `new Object()` will be executed every 
time a new `MyClass` object is instantiated. In D however, it 
seems to be executed once, and members of every `MyClass` object 
will then be initialized with a reference to that one unique 
`Object`.

Example: https://run.dlang.io/is/Qlx2xY

Is this behavior really intentional ? I don't really see how it 
could be useful, and it's really confusing at first to see new 
objects with weird values even if none of their members has been 
touched yet...

ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:

Laurent Tréguier wrote:

 Is this behavior really intentional ?

yes. default values should be the same for all objects. it is predictable, 
and allows to initialize objects to the known state simply by blitting 
`.init`.

that is, default values aren't a syntax sugar for defining implicit ctor 
actions, they are executed once. this is by design.

ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:

p.s.: still, it may be nice to warn user about that. 'cause such runtime 
initializations are really belong to static ctor. dunno, i'm ok both with 
warning and without it.

Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:

On Friday, 30 March 2018 at 11:04:59 UTC, ketmar wrote:
 p.s.: still, it may be nice to warn user about that. 'cause 
 such runtime initializations are really belong to static ctor. 
 dunno, i'm ok both with warning and without it.

I simply think a word about it in the docs would be nice, since 
this is tricky if you come from another language that doesn't do 
this. Otherwise I'm fine with it (and it's not exactly hard to 
fix either)

ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:

Laurent Tréguier wrote:

 On Friday, 30 March 2018 at 11:04:59 UTC, ketmar wrote:
 p.s.: still, it may be nice to warn user about that. 'cause such runtime 
 initializations are really belong to static ctor. dunno, i'm ok both 
 with warning and without it.

 I simply think a word about it in the docs would be nice, since this is 
 tricky if you come from another language that doesn't do this. Otherwise 
 I'm fine with it (and it's not exactly hard to fix either)

please, make an ER in bugzilla then. 'cause it will be lost here, and with 
ER we have a chance to eventually do that.

Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:

On Friday, 30 March 2018 at 11:14:32 UTC, ketmar wrote:
 please, make an ER in bugzilla then. 'cause it will be lost 
 here, and with ER we have a chance to eventually do that.

Will do.