• Chris Miller (4/4) Feb 07 2006 struct Foo { const Foo f; }
• Fredrik Olsson (4/13) Feb 08 2006 Would not this be recursive to infinity? Perhaps this is more in line
• Chris Miller (4/12) Feb 08 2006 Don't think so, not like it's actually adding to the struct's storage.
• Stewart Gordon (12/19) Feb 08 2006 Sounds like a regression to me. So what happens if it isn't const? It
• Jarrett Billingsley (13/15) Feb 08 2006 It still fails if the member is non-const.
• Thomas Kuehne (17/21) Feb 11 2006 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

"Chris Miller" <chris dprogramming.com> writes:

struct Foo { const Foo f; }


DMD 0.145 output on Windows:

test.d(1): struct test.Foo unable to resolve forward reference


Only seems to happen if it's const.

Fredrik Olsson <peylow treyst.se> writes:

Chris Miller skrev:
 struct Foo { const Foo f; }
 
 
 DMD 0.145 output on Windows:
 
 test.d(1): struct test.Foo unable to resolve forward reference
 
 
 Only seems to happen if it's const.

Would not this be recursive to infinity? Perhaps this is more in line 
what you want:
struct Foo { const Foo* f; }

"Chris Miller" <chris dprogramming.com> writes:

On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 03:20:10 -0500, Fredrik Olsson <peylow treyst.se>  
wrote:

 Chris Miller skrev:
 struct Foo { const Foo f; }
   DMD 0.145 output on Windows:
  test.d(1): struct test.Foo unable to resolve forward reference
   Only seems to happen if it's const.

 Would not this be recursive to infinity? Perhaps this is more in line  
 what you want:
 struct Foo { const Foo* f; }

Don't think so, not like it's actually adding to the struct's storage.  
More like a namespace thing or implying static as well.

Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:

Chris Miller wrote:
 struct Foo { const Foo f; }
 
 DMD 0.145 output on Windows:
 
 test.d(1): struct test.Foo unable to resolve forward reference
 
 Only seems to happen if it's const.

Sounds like a regression to me.  So what happens if it isn't const?  It 
should be an error regardless.  Will have to investigate....

Stewart.

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M d- s:- C++  a->--- UB  P+ L E  W++  N+++ o K-  w++  O? M V? PS- 
PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:dsclko$1c26$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Sounds like a regression to me.  So what happens if it isn't const?  It 
 should be an error regardless.

It still fails if the member is non-const.

Though, like Fredrik said, I would imagine that, since structs are value 
types, this should be illegal, because it would have to be a recursive 
structure - a Foo contains a Foo, which contains a Foo which contains a 
Foo.. perhaps this error message is the compiler's own special way of 
reporting this ;)  as

struct Foo
{
    [const] Foo* a;
}

Works. 

Thomas Kuehne <thomas-dloop kuehne.cn> writes:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Chris Miller schrieb am 2006-02-07:
 struct Foo { const Foo f; }


 DMD 0.145 output on Windows:

 test.d(1): struct test.Foo unable to resolve forward reference


 Only seems to happen if it's const.

Added to DStress as
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/s/struct_23_A.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/s/struct_23_B.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/s/struct_23_C.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/s/struct_23_D.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/s/struct_23_E.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/struct_23_F.d
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/struct_23_G.d

Thomas


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFD7bkU3w+/yD4P9tIRAlAxAJ9s9tRf4XLqxFuSgZUpgGEielpJ8QCgw3+2
Q3iUGr0cAA5whMQEFNQLUHk=
=xyBR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----