digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 9408] New: invariant should be non-const by default and settable to const
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (35/35) Jan 26 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9408
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (6/6) Jan 26 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9408
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (10/10) Feb 03 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9408
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (30/31) Feb 03 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9408
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9408 Summary: invariant should be non-const by default and settable to const Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: andrej.mitrovich gmail.com ReportedBy: andrej.mitrovich gmail.com 21:08:35 PST --- class C1 { int x; invariant() const { x = 1; // not ok } } class C2 { int x; invariant() { x = 1; // ok } } See also https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1073, and discussion http://forum.dlang.org/thread/jvh87s%241gl6%241 digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 26 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9408 21:45:00 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1560 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 26 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9408 Walter Bright <bugzilla digitalmars.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bugzilla digitalmars.com 11:20:58 PST --- I think this change is a step backwards. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 03 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9408 bearophile_hugs eml.cc changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bearophile_hugs eml.ccI think this change is a step backwards.I think in this discussion there are two main sides: Some people want to write D code right now, so they don't want to fight too much with problems caused by const. And they like "freedom". Often this side is also associated with the "worse is better" language design philosophy. They other camp reads the texts written by the creator of the Eiffel language, that explain what Contracts are and what they are meant to. For them a precondition or an invariant should never modify the state of the struct/class. And the language should enforce this, to avoid bugs. They accept less a bit less convenience for stronger guarantees and "cleaner" code. Mathematics-oriented people are often on this side. D language has introduced const/invariant, but it's so strong that sometimes you don't want or your can't use it. So sometimes D programmers don't want to eat their own dog food. I generally prefer a more "clean" style of coding, because from experience I have seen that the amount of time wasted making a fussy type system happy, is often paid later in less bugs, that otherwise waste far more of my time. But in the end I sympathize with both camps, for different reasons. Both are partially right. In the end a static analysis tool can just enforce all invariants to be tagged with "const", so the end result is not too much different. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 03 2013