struct Test
{
	int i;
	alias this = i;
}

Worked fine in 2.061 but in 2.062 I get the errors
"Error: no identifier for declarator this" and "Error: alias cannot have initializer".

Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?

Martin:

> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?

It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is allowed still for other aliases.

Bye,
bearophile

On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 14:55:19 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Martin:
>
>> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?
>
> It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is allowed still for other aliases.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

I see, thanks. What was the reason for not allowing alias this = identifier?

On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 14:58:02 UTC, Martin wrote:
> On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 14:55:19 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>> Martin:
>>
>>> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?
>>
>> It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is allowed still for other aliases.
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> I see, thanks. What was the reason for not allowing alias this = identifier?

Requiring lookahead when parsing.

On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 15:07:29 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 14:58:02 UTC, Martin wrote:
>> On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 14:55:19 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>>> Martin:
>>>
>>>> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?
>>>
>>> It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is allowed still for other aliases.
>>>
>>> Bye,
>>> bearophile
>>
>> I see, thanks. What was the reason for not allowing alias this = identifier?
>
> Requiring lookahead when parsing.

Alright, thanks!

On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 15:31:43 UTC, Martin wrote:
> On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 15:07:29 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 14:58:02 UTC, Martin wrote:
>>> On Friday, 22 February 2013 at 14:55:19 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>>>> Martin:
>>>>
>>>>> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?
>>>>
>>>> It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is allowed still for other aliases.
>>>>
>>>> Bye,
>>>> bearophile
>>>
>>> I see, thanks. What was the reason for not allowing alias this = identifier?
>>
>> Requiring lookahead when parsing.
>
> Alright, thanks!

Just to be clear : that was sarcastic, requiring lookahead when parsing is a drawback.

The idea is that alias and alias this are 2 different beasts. For instance you can have multiple alias this when you can only have one name per identifier.

It was wanted to distinguish the 2 with 2 different syntaxes.

On 02/22/2013 06:55 AM, bearophile wrote:
> Martin:
>
>> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?
>
> It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is
> allowed still for other aliases.

It is a regression at best because it is nowhere to be found in the changelog, at least not without clicking every single item in those lists.

Ali

On 02/22/2013 09:08 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> On 02/22/2013 06:55 AM, bearophile wrote:
>  > Martin:
>  >
>  >> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?
>  >
>  > It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is
>  > allowed still for other aliases.
>
> It is a regression at best

Posted:

  http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9569

Ali

2013/2/23 Ali Çehreli <acehreli@yahoo.com>

> On 02/22/2013 06:55 AM, bearophile wrote:
> > Martin:
> >
> >> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?
> >
> > It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is allowed still for other aliases.
>
> It is a regression at best because it is nowhere to be found in the changelog, at least not without clicking every single item in those lists.


That is intended change. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/issues/1413 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pull/224

Kenji Hara

On 02/22/2013 09:28 AM, kenji hara wrote:
> 2013/2/23 Ali Çehreli<acehreli@yahoo.com>
>
>> On 02/22/2013 06:55 AM, bearophile wrote:
>>> Martin:
>>>
>>>> Was something changed intentionally or is this a bug?
>>>
>>> It was changed intentionally, but only for alias this. That syntax is
>>> allowed still for other aliases.
>>
>> It is a regression at best because it is nowhere to be found in the
>> changelog, at least not without clicking every single item in those lists.
>
>
> That is intended change.
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/issues/1413
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pull/224

I appreciate everybody's contributions to D but that is not an intention, that is a change to dmd that caused a regression. A syntax that used to work in the previous version simply stopped working in 2.062. That is the definition of a regression. Normally, regressions are fixed as quickly as possible.

I have a feeling that there must have been some newsgroup discussions as well but unfortunately I must have been busy with other things at the time. Not all of us read github.

Ali