• Yuxuan Shui (4/4) Dec 08 2018 This surprised me A LOT:
• John Chapman (4/8) Dec 08 2018 But in your example, "(a) =>" returns "{return tmp;}", which is a
• Steven Schveighoffer (4/15) Dec 09 2018 This is exactly why (a) => {return tmp;} should not compile.

Yuxuan Shui <yshuiv7 gmail.com> writes:

This surprised me A LOT:

https://d.godbolt.org/z/82a_GZ

So if I call something.map!().array, I get an array of delegates? 
That makes no sense to me.

John Chapman <johnch_atms hotmail.com> writes:

On Saturday, 8 December 2018 at 13:02:00 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
 This surprised me A LOT:

 https://d.godbolt.org/z/82a_GZ

 So if I call something.map!().array, I get an array of 
 delegates? That makes no sense to me.

But in your example, "(a) =>" returns "{return tmp;}", which is a 
delegate. Just write "(a) => tmp", or invoke the delegate by 
turning it into a call: "{return tmp;}()".

Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy gmail.com> writes:

On 12/8/18 8:19 AM, John Chapman wrote:
 On Saturday, 8 December 2018 at 13:02:00 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
 This surprised me A LOT:

 https://d.godbolt.org/z/82a_GZ

 So if I call something.map!().array, I get an array of delegates? That 
 makes no sense to me.

 
 But in your example, "(a) =>" returns "{return tmp;}", which is a 
 delegate. Just write "(a) => tmp", or invoke the delegate by turning it 
 into a call: "{return tmp;}()".

This is exactly why (a) => {return tmp;} should not compile.

Almost everyone has made that mistake.

-Steve