digitalmars.D.learn - Quick question about new semantics
- monarch_dodra (24/24) Sep 14 2012 I have a struct, which defines a constructor that takes an
- Steven Schveighoffer (5/28) Sep 14 2012 It is a bug.
I have a struct, which defines a constructor that takes an argument. Now, I'd like to new this object, to it's default T.init value (eg call new, but now constructors): -------- struct S { this(int); } void main() { auto p1 = new S; auto p2 = new S(); } -------- main.d(8): Error: constructor main.S.this (int) is not callable using argument types () main.d(8): Error: expected 1 function arguments, not 0 main.d(9): Error: constructor main.S.this (int) is not callable using argument types () main.d(9): Error: expected 1 function arguments, not 0 -------- Is this a bug? If "auto a = S();" is legal, how can "auto p = new S();" not be?
Sep 14 2012
On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:27:56 -0400, monarch_dodra <monarchdodra gmail.com> wrote:I have a struct, which defines a constructor that takes an argument. Now, I'd like to new this object, to it's default T.init value (eg call new, but now constructors): -------- struct S { this(int); } void main() { auto p1 = new S; auto p2 = new S(); } -------- main.d(8): Error: constructor main.S.this (int) is not callable using argument types () main.d(8): Error: expected 1 function arguments, not 0 main.d(9): Error: constructor main.S.this (int) is not callable using argument types () main.d(9): Error: expected 1 function arguments, not 0 -------- Is this a bug? If "auto a = S();" is legal, how can "auto p = new S();" not be?It is a bug. http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4247 -Steve
Sep 14 2012