• Dan (21/21) Feb 08 2013 This constant in a module causes a compilation error of the
• anonymous (4/25) Feb 08 2013 unittest blocks are evaluated at run time, just like your
• Lubos Pintes (5/36) Feb 18 2013 Yesterday I solved similar problem by using enum.
• =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= (31/35) Feb 18 2013 Be careful with that though: 'games' is a literal associative array,
• Lubos Pintes (4/40) Feb 18 2013 Thank for explanation. I supposed that the enum constant is fixed and
• =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= (9/14) Feb 18 2013 And to be honest, I am not sure why I define it as 'static immutable'.

"Dan" <dbdavidson yahoo.com> writes:

This constant in a module causes a compilation error of the 
"non-constant expression" variety.

DEFINITION 1
   const(AssetProjectionMap) SavingsGrowth2013 = [
     AssetReturnType.Interest :
     RateCurve([DateRate(Date.min, CcRate(0.007))]),
   ];

The fix that addresses this error at module level is:

DEFINITION 2

const(AssetProjectionMap) SavingsGrowth2013;
static this() {
   SavingsGrowth2013 = [
     AssetReturnType.Interest :
     RateCurve([DateRate(Date.min, CcRate(0.007))]),
   ];
}


However, the same constant, when defined in a unittest block 
works with DEFINITION 1. What is the reason for the difference 
between unittest constants and module constants?

Thanks,
Dan

"anonymous" <anonymous example.com> writes:

On Friday, 8 February 2013 at 20:12:41 UTC, Dan wrote:
 This constant in a module causes a compilation error of the 
 "non-constant expression" variety.

 DEFINITION 1
   const(AssetProjectionMap) SavingsGrowth2013 = [
     AssetReturnType.Interest :
     RateCurve([DateRate(Date.min, CcRate(0.007))]),
   ];

 The fix that addresses this error at module level is:

 DEFINITION 2

 const(AssetProjectionMap) SavingsGrowth2013;
 static this() {
   SavingsGrowth2013 = [
     AssetReturnType.Interest :
     RateCurve([DateRate(Date.min, CcRate(0.007))]),
   ];
 }


 However, the same constant, when defined in a unittest block 
 works with DEFINITION 1. What is the reason for the difference 
 between unittest constants and module constants?

 Thanks,
 Dan

unittest blocks are evaluated at run time, just like your 
DEFINITION 2, and unlike your DEFINITION 1 which would be 
evaluated at compile time.

Lubos Pintes <lubos.pintes gmail.com> writes:

Yesterday I solved similar problem by using enum.
enum GameInfo[string] games=[
...
];
Dòa 8. 2. 2013 21:21 anonymous  wrote / napísal(a):
 On Friday, 8 February 2013 at 20:12:41 UTC, Dan wrote:
 This constant in a module causes a compilation error of the
 "non-constant expression" variety.

 DEFINITION 1
   const(AssetProjectionMap) SavingsGrowth2013 = [
     AssetReturnType.Interest :
     RateCurve([DateRate(Date.min, CcRate(0.007))]),
   ];

 The fix that addresses this error at module level is:

 DEFINITION 2

 const(AssetProjectionMap) SavingsGrowth2013;
 static this() {
   SavingsGrowth2013 = [
     AssetReturnType.Interest :
     RateCurve([DateRate(Date.min, CcRate(0.007))]),
   ];
 }


 However, the same constant, when defined in a unittest block works
 with DEFINITION 1. What is the reason for the difference between
 unittest constants and module constants?

 Thanks,
 Dan

 unittest blocks are evaluated at run time, just like your DEFINITION 2,
 and unlike your DEFINITION 1 which would be evaluated at compile time.

=?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:

On 02/18/2013 08:59 AM, Lubos Pintes wrote:
 Yesterday I solved similar problem by using enum.
 enum GameInfo[string] games=[
 ...
 ];

Be careful with that though: 'games' is a literal associative array, 
meaning that it will be used in the program as if it's copy-pasted in 
that location. It looks like there is a single associative array, but 
there is a new temporary created every time you use 'games':

struct GameInfo
{
     int i;
}

enum GameInfo[string] games = [ "one" : GameInfo(1) ];

void main()
{
     assert(&(games["one"]) != &(games["one"]));    // note: !=
}

As the two games are different, their elements are not at the same location.

This is one way to go:

struct GameInfo
{
     int i;
}

static immutable GameInfo[string] games;

static this()
{
     games = [ "one" : GameInfo(1) ];
}

void main()
{
     assert(&(games["one"]) == &(games["one"]));    // note ==
}

This time there is just one 'games'.

Ali

Lubos Pintes <lubos.pintes gmail.com> writes:

Thank for explanation. I supposed that the enum constant is fixed and 
that it is also true for AA.
I will convert my code before I forget. :-).
Dòa 18. 2. 2013 18:22 Ali Çehreli  wrote / napísal(a):
 On 02/18/2013 08:59 AM, Lubos Pintes wrote:
  > Yesterday I solved similar problem by using enum.
  > enum GameInfo[string] games=[
  > ...
  > ];

 Be careful with that though: 'games' is a literal associative array,
 meaning that it will be used in the program as if it's copy-pasted in
 that location. It looks like there is a single associative array, but
 there is a new temporary created every time you use 'games':

 struct GameInfo
 {
      int i;
 }

 enum GameInfo[string] games = [ "one" : GameInfo(1) ];

 void main()
 {
      assert(&(games["one"]) != &(games["one"]));    // note: !=
 }

 As the two games are different, their elements are not at the same
 location.

 This is one way to go:

 struct GameInfo
 {
      int i;
 }

 static immutable GameInfo[string] games;

 static this()
 {
      games = [ "one" : GameInfo(1) ];
 }

 void main()
 {
      assert(&(games["one"]) == &(games["one"]));    // note ==
 }

 This time there is just one 'games'.

 Ali

=?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:

On 02/18/2013 09:22 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 static immutable GameInfo[string] games;

 static this()
 {
 games = [ "one" : GameInfo(1) ];
 }

And to be honest, I am not sure why I define it as 'static immutable'. 
:) Isn't this the same thing?

immutable GameInfo[string] games;

static this()
{
     games = [ "one" : GameInfo(1) ];
}

Ali