On Monday, 5 February 2024 at 14:26:45 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 January 2024 at 15:38:26 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
[...]
This definitely isn't allowed in C or C++. I wonder what the
rationale is for having this behavior in D?
[1]: https://dlang.org/spec/expression.html
An hypothes
On Tuesday, 30 January 2024 at 15:38:26 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
[...]
This definitely isn't allowed in C or C++. I wonder what the
rationale is for having this behavior in D?
[1]: https://dlang.org/spec/expression.html
An hypothesis is that this makes codegening the pre and the post
variant
On Tuesday, 30 January 2024 at 15:38:26 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
This definitely isn't allowed in C or C++. I wonder what the
rationale is for having this behavior in D?
It isn't allowed in C, but allowed in C++
https://godbolt.org/z/9xTPhsb5G
As for rationale... I don't know why it wouldn't b
On Tuesday, 30 January 2024 at 02:05:23 UTC, user1234 wrote:
I want to share a stupid program to show you that D safety is
more complex than you might think:
```d
module test;
void test() @safe
{
int i;
int b = (*&(*&++i))++;
}
void main() @safe
{
test();
}
```
I'm not showing a
I want to share a stupid program to show you that D safety is
more complex than you might think:
```d
module test;
void test() @safe
{
int i;
int b = (*&(*&++i))++;
}
void main() @safe
{
test();
}
```
I'm not showing a deficiency of D, that program is undeniably
safe ;)
