https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16058

Eyal Lotem <eyal.lotem@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |eyal.lotem@gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Eyal Lotem <eyal.lotem@gmail.com> ---
I think it makes sense for the types not to be considered equal. (Head-mutable ptrs to immutable data exist, so why should delegates be inconsistent?)

--

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16058

Sobirari Muhomori <dfj1esp02@sneakemail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           See Also|                            |https://issues.dlang.org/sh
                   |                            |ow_bug.cgi?id=1983

--

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16058

--- Comment #2 from ag0aep6g@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Eyal Lotem from comment #1)
> I think it makes sense for the types not to be considered equal. (Head-mutable ptrs to immutable data exist, so why should delegates be inconsistent?)

A head mutable delegate would be `void delegate() immutable`, no? That is considered different from the two types this is about.

--

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16058

--- Comment #3 from Kenji Hara <k.hara.pg@gmail.com> ---
>From the type qualifier transitivity, immutable(int* delegate()) should be same
with immutable(int* delegate() immutable).

The root problem is in dmd implementation, TypeNext.makeXXX functions. Fixing those implementation bugs is not difficult.

--

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16058

Bolpat <qs.il.paperinik@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |qs.il.paperinik@gmail.com

--