http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5803

           Summary: Inaccuracies in the specification of the grammar
           Product: D
           Version: D2
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: websites
        AssignedTo: nobody@puremagic.com
        ReportedBy: r.sagitario@gmx.de


--- Comment #0 from Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario@gmx.de> 2011-03-30 23:03:45 PDT ---
The language definition has a number of smaller and larger inaccuracies. You can find a comparison chart of the grammar in the docs and a grammar used to parse the public test suite and the runtime library (minus some deprecated features) here:

http://www.dsource.org/projects/visuald/wiki/GrammarComparison

This is with respect to the state of the documentation in December 2010, so a few additions and modifications have already made it into the current documentation.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5803


Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |clugdbug@yahoo.com.au


--- Comment #1 from Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> 2011-03-31 03:05:48 PDT ---
One fairly big mistake in there: there seems to be confusion between StructLiteral and StructStaticInitializer.

Foo z = { x: 7, y: 56};
is a struct static initializer, not a struct literal.
Foo(7, 56); is a struct literal.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5803


Trass3r <mrmocool@gmx.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mrmocool@gmx.de


--- Comment #2 from Trass3r <mrmocool@gmx.de> 2011-03-31 04:22:11 PDT ---
I'm already working on folding some of the changes I agree with into my github fork @ https://github.com/Trass3r/d-programming-language.org

Will push soon.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5803



--- Comment #3 from Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario@gmx.de> 2011-03-31 12:01:27 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> One fairly big mistake in there: there seems to be confusion between StructLiteral and StructStaticInitializer.

Maybe I oversimplified here, but I was hoping for a generalization of the array/struct initializer and literals.

IIRC the StructStaticInitializer is said to be deprecated anyway, but it might actually be possible to interpret it as a literal inside expressions with implicite conversions, similar how dmd deals with arrays, because the parser cannot decide which type of array a variable is declared as until the semantic pass.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5803



--- Comment #4 from Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> 2011-03-31 13:11:27 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > One fairly big mistake in there: there seems to be confusion between StructLiteral and StructStaticInitializer.
> 
> Maybe I oversimplified here, but I was hoping for a generalization of the array/struct initializer and literals.
> 
> IIRC the StructStaticInitializer is said to be deprecated anyway, but it might actually be possible to interpret it as a literal inside expressions with implicite conversions, similar how dmd deals with arrays, because the parser cannot decide which type of array a variable is declared as until the semantic pass.

They have very different semantics. Given only a StructLiteral, you can always work out what type it is. But with a static initializer, you know nothing. This might be the only thing in the language like that. It's not implicit conversion, they don't have an initial type to convert from.

So  auto x = StructLiteral();  works, but auto x = structStaticInitializer cannot. Consequently, you can use a struct literal almost anywhere you can use a struct variable.

I've tried to get them deprecated but I don't know if that will happen. They are one of the most complicated things in the language, and the implementation is *full* of bugs.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------