• "Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> Dec 21 2001
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 21 2001
• "Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> Dec 22 2001
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 22 2001
• "Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> Dec 22 2001
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 22 2001
• "Sean L. Palmer" <spalmer iname.com> Dec 22 2001

Feature suggestion. It would be nice if D could determine
type of constant automatically, so we could write:

    const i = 10, d = 123.456, s = "Hello, world!"

Would be great...

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a003uc$1m0e$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Feature suggestion. It would be nice if D could determine
 type of constant automatically, so we could write:

     const i = 10, d = 123.456, s = "Hello, world!"

 Would be great...


Actually, with string literals, the compiler does do that. But it has
resulted in a lot of problems. It's much better to just say what type it is.

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a00e4m$1thm$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Actually, with string literals, the compiler does do that. But it has


The following program doesn't compile:

    const i = 666;
    const s = "hello, world!";

 resulted in a lot of problems. It's much better to just say what type it



Problems?

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a01g86$2ma7$2 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:a00e4m$1thm$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Actually, with string literals, the compiler does do that. But it has


 The following program doesn't compile:

     const i = 666;
     const s = "hello, world!";


Yes, it won't, because while "hello, world" starts out typeless, the
declaration for s needs a type.

 resulted in a lot of problems. It's much better to just say what type it



 Problems?


One problem, for example, is "a" a char, char[1], wchar, wchar[1]? This
causes trouble with overloading.

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a02ebb$ajb$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Yes, it won't, because while "hello, world" starts out typeless, the
 declaration for s needs a type.


That was exactly my proposal - make the type in const declarations
unnecessary...

 One problem, for example, is "a" a char, char[1], wchar, wchar[1]? This
 causes trouble with overloading.


Whatever it suites - like a literal "a" can be a char or a char[1]
depending on context. Ambiguities with overloading are easily
resolved using cast(). Or, typed consts could be used in these cases.

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a02ikb$dlr$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:a02ebb$ajb$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Yes, it won't, because while "hello, world" starts out typeless, the
 declaration for s needs a type.


 unnecessary...
 One problem, for example, is "a" a char, char[1], wchar, wchar[1]? This
 causes trouble with overloading.


 depending on context. Ambiguities with overloading are easily
 resolved using cast(). Or, typed consts could be used in these cases.


The language can handle a few ambiguities requiring casting like string
literals. Doing it in general, like for variables, will fill the code up
with ugly casting.

Lazy, lazy, lazy!!!

Sean

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a003uc$1m0e$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Feature suggestion. It would be nice if D could determine
 type of constant automatically, so we could write:

     const i = 10, d = 123.456, s = "Hello, world!"

 Would be great...