Hi,

	as confirmed by downs, myself and bearophile in the 'works in gdc-1.0'
thread this is a bug in D 2.0. Guess I get a bugtracker account.
Dooh! what a way to start to learn a language :P Just kidding, I like D
a lot, it's a neat language.

	-Tobias

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Tobias Kieslich wrote:
> Now, here it is where it gets weird. Dynamic arrays of static arrays:
> 
> 	int [2][] b =[[0,1],[2,3]];
> 	b ~= [[4,5]];  // fail, because concatenate [2u][] with [][1u]
> 	b ~= [4,5];    // success but wrong result as b holds now:
> 	// [[0 1] [2 3] [4 5] [0 0]]
> 

Tobias Kieslich Wrote:
> this is a bug in D 2.0. Guess I get a bugtracker account.
> Dooh! what a way to start to learn a language :P Just kidding, I like D
> a lot, it's a neat language.

Use D 1.x, it's much more used and more debugged :-)

Bye,
bearophile

hi,

	after some more thinking i figured I'm way to preoccupied with my
scipting language past. I am concatenating apples and oranges here, it
seems. So let's go again:

	int [2][] y = [[1,2],[3,4]];
	writefln("%s --- length: %d", y, y.length );
	//y = y ~ [[9,10]]; // fail because concatenate [2u][] with [][1u]
	//y = y ~ [9,10]; // success, but wrong result
	//y = y ~ cast (int [2]) [9,10]; // success, but wrong result
	y = y ~ cast (int [2][]) [[9,10]]; // success, right result

so a very properly casted array can be concatenated, however, I think
that this line should produce a proper result as well:
	y = y ~ cast (int [2]) [9,10]; // success, but wrong result

especially because the following fails as well:
	int [2][] y = [[1,2],[3,4]];
	int [2] yx = [40,50];
	y = y ~ yx; // success, but wrong result
	writefln("%s --- length: %d", y, y.length );
	// [[1 2] [3 4] [40 50] [-1075618328 134587053]] --- length: 4

	-Tobias

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, bearophile wrote:

> Use D 1.x, it's much more used and more debugged :-)
yepp, well, I'm a Linux package maintainer, I have no problems running some less stable stuff.

I have more trouble in this case to find out what is the desired behaviour, if I have to cast etc., well newbie stuff actually :P

	-Tobias

Tobias Kieslich schrieb:
> hi,
> 
> 	after some more thinking i figured I'm way to preoccupied with my
> scipting language past. I am concatenating apples and oranges here, it
> seems. So let's go again:
> 
> 	int [2][] y = [[1,2],[3,4]];
> 	writefln("%s --- length: %d", y, y.length );
> 	//y = y ~ [[9,10]]; // fail because concatenate [2u][] with [][1u]
> 	//y = y ~ [9,10]; // success, but wrong result
> 	//y = y ~ cast (int [2]) [9,10]; // success, but wrong result
> 	y = y ~ cast (int [2][]) [[9,10]]; // success, right result
> 
> so a very properly casted array can be concatenated, however, I think
> that this line should produce a proper result as well:
> 	y = y ~ cast (int [2]) [9,10]; // success, but wrong result
> 
> especially because the following fails as well:
> 	int [2][] y = [[1,2],[3,4]];
> 	int [2] yx = [40,50];
> 	y = y ~ yx; // success, but wrong result
> 	writefln("%s --- length: %d", y, y.length );
> 	// [[1 2] [3 4] [40 50] [-1075618328 134587053]] --- length: 4
> 
> 	-Tobias

This sounds like it might be related to http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1891

At least the output looks quite similar.

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Sönke Ludwig wrote:

> This sounds like it might be related to http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1891

yes agreed, shame on me I searched for the wrong keywords,or misspelled them so I filed a duplicated bug :(

	-Tobias