digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 2094] New: transitive const can be broken easily
- d-bugmail puremagic.com May 11 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 17 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 17 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 18 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 18 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 18 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 18 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 18 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 19 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Jun 19 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Oct 06 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Oct 07 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Oct 07 2008
- d-bugmail puremagic.com Oct 08 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 Summary: transitive const can be broken easily Product: D Version: 2.012 Platform: PC URL: http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_gr oup=digitalmars.D&article_id=71465 OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Keywords: spec Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: www.digitalmars.com AssignedTo: bugzilla digitalmars.com ReportedBy: terranium yandex.ru class A { private int[] Xrg; int[] rg() const { return Xrg; } } void f(invariant A a) { a.rg[0]=0; } --
May 11 2008
d-bugmail puremagic.com http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #1 from terranium yandex.ru 2008-06-17 09:40 ------- C++ solution: forces rg to have return type const int[] --
Jun 17 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #2 from 2korden gmail.com 2008-06-17 09:54 ------- It shouldn't be able to compile and in fact it doesn't (tested with DMD2.013): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (this.Xrg) of type const(int[]) to int[] --
Jun 17 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #3 from terranium yandex.ru 2008-06-18 02:09 ------- So one should write two getters: const and non-const? --
Jun 18 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #4 from wbaxter gmail.com 2008-06-18 05:28 ------- (In reply to comment #3)So one should write two getters: const and non-const?
That's generally how it's done in C++, yes. But in D you may need three, actually. invariant, const, and non-const. There was much discussion about creating some rules so that D doesn't require that kind of repetition, but Walter never gave any of the ideas a nod as far as I know. --
Jun 18 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 2korden gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |INVALID ------- Comment #5 from 2korden gmail.com 2008-06-18 06:11 ------- Shall we close this one? --
Jun 18 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 braddr puremagic.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | ------- Comment #6 from braddr puremagic.com 2008-06-18 11:18 ------- No. invariantness if f's arg isn't being preserved, so this is a hole that Walter should see. I've reopened. --
Jun 18 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #7 from wbaxter gmail.com 2008-06-19 01:05 ------- I was just browsing through WalterAndrei.pdf from last year's D conference, when I noticed the "return" storage class. I had forgotten about that one. So I was wrong about Walter not having endorsed any particular solution to the redundant const methods problem. The solution he proposed at the D conference was to have something like: const(char[]) capitalize(return const(char[]) s) { ... } --
Jun 18 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #8 from terranium yandex.ru 2008-06-19 02:42 ------- (In reply to comment #4)But in D you may need three, actually. invariant, const, and non-const.
(In reply to comment #7)I was just browsing through WalterAndrei.pdf from last year's D conference, when I noticed the "return" storage class. I had forgotten about that one.
- this. (In reply to comment #6)No. invariantness if f's arg isn't being preserved, so this is a hole that Walter should see. I've reopened.
severity could be canged to RFE, I'm not sure, what you want. --
Jun 19 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #9 from wbaxter gmail.com 2008-06-19 07:19 ------- (In reply to comment #8)(In reply to comment #4)But in D you may need three, actually. invariant, const, and non-const.
If you're hoping to be able to assign the result to an invariant then you'll need an invariant flavor of it. --
Jun 19 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #10 from schveiguy yahoo.com 2008-10-06 18:55 ------- (In reply to comment #6)No. invariantness if f's arg isn't being preserved, so this is a hole that Walter should see. I've reopened.
I don't see how that matters. You should be able to call const functions on an invariant object. Note that the submitted code doesn't actually compile. As an aside, the scoped const proposal I made would solve the 3 versions of a function requirement. http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1961 --
Oct 06 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #11 from terranium yandex.ru 2008-10-07 02:17 ------- we expect to get invariant data from invariant object. --
Oct 07 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 ------- Comment #12 from schveiguy yahoo.com 2008-10-07 08:40 ------- (In reply to comment #11)we expect to get invariant data from invariant object.
Then define an invariant function. Const is the equalizer, and it's perfectly acceptable to get invariant data as const. All const means is that the function will not modify the data, and will not return anything but const references to the data. It doesn't mean that if the data is invariant, the function magically returns invariant. I don't see how this bug is valid. --
Oct 07 2008
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2094 terranium yandex.ru changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED ------- Comment #13 from terranium yandex.ru 2008-10-08 11:54 ------- As you insist, I extracted RFE to bug 2400. --
Oct 08 2008