www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - literals, additional questions

Given this test code snippet:

 void test1(char[] s) { }
 void test1(wchar[] s) { }
 
 void test2(byte[] s) { }
 void test2(int[] s) { }
 
 void main()
 {
   char[] s = "foo";
   test1(s);
 
   static int[] i = [ 0, 1, 2 ];
   test2(i);
 
   test1(cast(char[]) "bar");
 //test2(cast(byte[]) [0, 1, 2]);
 }

1) Why does "i" require a static initializer ? (or making as the variable static, as above)
 literals.d:8: variable literals.main.i is not a static and
               cannot have static initializer

It seems to work just fine for the string ? 2) Why could not the eg. int[] literals work as strings do ? (in that you have to insert a cast to resolve overloads)
 literals.d:16: function literals.test1 overloads void(char[]s) and
                void(wchar[]s) both match argument list for test1

I understand ambiguity is the biggest stop for those ? Would this be helped if those literal arrays had the proposed .readonly keyword attached to them ? Or will those literals and the hash literals not come until D 2.0 ("second coming"), no matter what ? --anders
Feb 08 2005