http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2945

           Summary: Precedence of 'new' vs '.'
           Product: D
           Version: 1.042
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: bugzilla@digitalmars.com
        ReportedBy: benoit@tionex.de


In Java one can write:

new MyClass().run();

in D this does not compile, parenthesis are needed.

(new MyClass()).run();

I think this should behave like Java.
See also
http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=89433


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2945


matti.niemenmaa+dbugzilla@iki.fi changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Platform|PC                          |All




------- Comment #1 from matti.niemenmaa+dbugzilla@iki.fi  2009-05-06 04:50 -------
There might be a problem here in that in D you can write it without the brackets:

new MyClass.Foo;

Is the above trying to create a new Myclass.Foo or is it trying to create a new MyClass and then access its Foo member? It depends on the type of Foo, and such a dependency is, I think, what Walter has been trying to avoid.

Nevertheless, I often forget the brackets myself and wouldn't mind this change, I just think the above means that it's not going to happen.


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2945





------- Comment #2 from simen.kjaras@gmail.com  2009-05-06 07:53 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> There might be a problem here in that in D you can write it without the brackets:
> 
> new MyClass.Foo;
> 
> Is the above trying to create a new Myclass.Foo or is it trying to create a new MyClass and then access its Foo member? It depends on the type of Foo, and such a dependency is, I think, what Walter has been trying to avoid.
> 
> Nevertheless, I often forget the brackets myself and wouldn't mind this change, I just think the above means that it's not going to happen.
> 

Ceraintly. However, new MyClass().Foo; has no such ambiguity until D becomes capable of returning types from functions.

--
  Simen


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2945





------- Comment #3 from schveiguy@yahoo.com  2009-05-06 09:05 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> Ceraintly. However, new MyClass().Foo; has no such ambiguity until D becomes capable of returning types from functions.

Traditionally, runtime reflection like that is done by calling methods on the returned type, not by using a compile-time operator.

So it would look more like:

MyClass.Foo.instantiate();


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2945


Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com
         Resolution|                            |DUPLICATE


--- Comment #4 from Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> 2013-01-11 19:44:14 PST ---
*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 8635 ***

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