• Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> Oct 01 2011
• bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> Oct 01 2011
• mta`chrono <chrono mta-international.net> Oct 01 2011
• "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> Oct 01 2011
• Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> Oct 02 2011

Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:

int[2] a;
immutable(int)[2] b = a;

I get "Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (a) of type int[2u] 
to immutable(int)[]"

Is there are reason for disallowing this, or is it a bug?

bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Peter Alexander:

 int[2] a;
 immutable(int)[2] b = a;
 
 I get "Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (a) of type int[2u] 
 to immutable(int)[]"
 
 Is there are reason for disallowing this, or is it a bug?


It's a bug.
And I think the error message too is wrong, it prints "immutable(int)[]"
instead of "immutable(int)[2]".

Bye,
bearophile

mta`chrono <chrono mta-international.net> writes:

int[2] a;
immutable(int)[2] b = a.idup;

Am 01.10.2011 13:00, schrieb Peter Alexander:
 int[2] a;
 immutable(int)[2] b = a;
 
 I get "Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (a) of type int[2u]
 to immutable(int)[]"
 
 Is there are reason for disallowing this, or is it a bug?

"Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 08:32:56 -0400, mta`chrono  
<chrono mta-international.net> wrote:

 int[2] a;
 immutable(int)[2] b = a.idup;


That should not be necessary.  There's no reason to allocate a heap array  
in order to copy data that implicitly casts to immutable.

Definitely a bug.

-Steve

Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:

On 2/10/11 12:44 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
 On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 08:32:56 -0400, mta`chrono
 <chrono mta-international.net> wrote:

 int[2] a;
 immutable(int)[2] b = a.idup;


 That should not be necessary. There's no reason to allocate a heap array
 in order to copy data that implicitly casts to immutable.

 Definitely a bug.

 -Steve


Yep.

Looks like dsimcha beat me to the bug report:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4454

Up-voted!