digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 9715] New: Implement basic template error checking
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (40/40) Mar 14 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9715
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (10/10) Mar 14 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9715
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (7/7) Mar 14 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9715
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9715 Summary: Implement basic template error checking Product: D Version: D1 & D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com ReportedBy: clugdbug yahoo.com.au int foo(T)(T x, int yesterday) { return yesteray; } ---- There is a typo in this template, it will fail for any type T. Would be nice if this reported an error, without having to instantiate the template. We could do this by creating a new Unspecified type and UnspecifiedExp in the compiler. Whenever a template declaration is encountered, instantiate it with Unspecified types. These guys would propagate exactly like ErrorExp. Then, we'd get error messages for the simple cases like those shown above. You could actually do 'static if' the same way (types declared in is() expressions inside static if will be Unspecified type if they depend on template parameters), but the challenge is when you have multiple independent static ifs in a template: static if (T.sizeof == 2) int x = 3; static if (T.sizeof > 2) int x = 4; // this isn't a redefinition error There are ways to deal with this, eg treating the inside of the static if as a scope, and when the static if has been analyzed, moving everything declared in that scope into the parent scope, marking it as PossiblyDeclared. (so that redefining it doesn't cause an error, but it's OK to use it from inside another static if). The simpler option would be to stop analysis after the first 'static if' is encountered. That would still catch errors in a lot of useful cases. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Mar 14 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9715 Walter Bright <bugzilla digitalmars.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bugzilla digitalmars.com 13:04:34 PDT --- It's a good idea, but the pervasiveness of ErrorExp is still pretty incomplete. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Mar 14 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9715 14:34:05 PDT --- Another issue is what happens with value and alias parameters. A fair amount of reengineering of the internals would be necessary to make this work. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Mar 14 2013