January 21, 2012
On Saturday, January 21, 2012 03:44:53 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> Probably Windows-only:
> 
> void main()
> {
>     string a = "foo";
>     "foo" = "bar";
>     writeln(a);  // "foo"
>     assert(a == "foo");  // failure
> }

Yeah. I don't understand why string literals aren't treated as fully immutable in Windows. They are in Linux. It makes no sense to be able to alter string literals.

- Jonathan M Davis
January 21, 2012
"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.640.1327115503.16222.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...
> On Saturday, January 21, 2012 03:44:53 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> Probably Windows-only:
>>
>> void main()
>> {
>>     string a = "foo";
>>     "foo" = "bar";
>>     writeln(a);  // "foo"
>>     assert(a == "foo");  // failure
>> }
>
> Yeah. I don't understand why string literals aren't treated as fully
> immutable
> in Windows.

Or as rvalues.

> They are in Linux. It makes no sense to be able to alter string literals.
>


January 21, 2012
On Friday, January 20, 2012 22:14:43 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.640.1327115503.16222.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...
> 
> > On Saturday, January 21, 2012 03:44:53 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> >> Probably Windows-only:
> >> 
> >> void main()
> >> {
> >> 
> >>     string a = "foo";
> >>     "foo" = "bar";
> >>     writeln(a);  // "foo"
> >>     assert(a == "foo");  // failure
> >> 
> >> }
> > 
> > Yeah. I don't understand why string literals aren't treated as fully
> > immutable
> > in Windows.
> 
> Or as rvalues.

Yeah. String literals should definitely be immutable rvalues, and they should be that way _regardless_ of the OS or architecture.

- Jonathan M Davis
January 21, 2012
On Saturday, 21 January 2012 at 03:18:43 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Yeah. String literals should definitely be immutable rvalues,

consider this though:

auto a = "hello";
a = "new";

If is("hello" == immutable(char[])), then a would
be too, and the rebinding would fail.

That'd be annoying.
January 21, 2012
On 01/21/2012 04:17 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Friday, January 20, 2012 22:14:43 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Jonathan M Davis"<jmdavisProg@gmx.com>  wrote in message
>> news:mailman.640.1327115503.16222.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...
>>
>>> On Saturday, January 21, 2012 03:44:53 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>>> Probably Windows-only:
>>>>
>>>> void main()
>>>> {
>>>>
>>>>      string a = "foo";
>>>>      "foo" = "bar";
>>>>      writeln(a);  // "foo"
>>>>      assert(a == "foo");  // failure
>>>>
>>>> }
>>>
>>> Yeah. I don't understand why string literals aren't treated as fully
>>> immutable
>>> in Windows.
>>
>> Or as rvalues.
>
> Yeah. String literals should definitely be immutable rvalues, and they should
> be that way _regardless_ of the OS or architecture.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Tail immutable rvalue is fine. It would be annoying if they were immutable.
January 21, 2012
On Friday, 20 January 2012 at 15:40:44 UTC, Robert Clipsham wrote:
> Just came across this amusing 4 minute video:
>
> https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
>
> Anyone have any other WATs you can do in other languages? Bonus points for WATs you can do in D.


January 21, 2012
On Friday, 20 January 2012 at 15:40:44 UTC, Robert Clipsham wrote:
> https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat


Curious: anyone here checked out the author's screencasts?

I found this video amusing so I looked at the others,
but he wants money for it.

Worth the ten bucks?


January 21, 2012
On Saturday, January 21, 2012 04:20:36 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Saturday, 21 January 2012 at 03:18:43 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
> 
> wrote:
> > Yeah. String literals should definitely be immutable rvalues,
> 
> consider this though:
> 
> auto a = "hello";
> a = "new";
> 
> If is("hello" == immutable(char[])), then a would
> be too, and the rebinding would fail.
> 
> That'd be annoying.

Well, when it was changed so that IFTI treated arrays as tail-const, dsimcha proposed that we do the same with auto. If we did that, then it solves the problem.

- Jonathan M Davis
January 21, 2012
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 20 January 2012 at 15:40:44 UTC, Robert Clipsham wrote:
>>
>> https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
>
>
>
> Curious: anyone here checked out the author's screencasts?
>
> I found this video amusing so I looked at the others,
> but he wants money for it.
>
> Worth the ten bucks?
>
>

You could watch this for free, but it's not amusing.  I know, I just graduated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpZtX32sKVE
January 21, 2012
On Saturday, 21 January 2012 at 03:43:50 UTC, Caligo wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpZtX32sKVE

Oh my, don't get me started on college!

I'm so happy I dropped out of that waste.