Example 1:

import std.stdio;

enum WindowSizes : QSize
{
    Minimum = QSize(10)
}

struct QSize
{
    int store;
    this(int x)
    {
        store = x + 10;
    }
}

void main()
{
    auto foo = WindowSizes.Minimum;
    assert(foo.store == 10);  // What?

    auto bar = QSize(10);
    assert(bar.store == 20);
}

It appears the constructor is never called for the enum. It does field by field assignments instead, just take a look at this case:

import std.stdio;

enum WindowSizes : Inverted
{
    Minimum = Inverted(10, 20)
}

struct Inverted
{
    int x;
    int y;
    this(int in_x, int in_y)
    {
        x = in_y;
        y = in_x;
    }
}

void main()
{
    auto foo = WindowSizes.Minimum;
    assert(foo.x == 10);
    assert(foo.y == 20);

    auto bar = Inverted(10, 20);
    assert(bar.x == 20);
    assert(bar.y == 10);
}

As can be seen, this could be a potential source of bugs. Should I file it?

On Tuesday, January 18, 2011 08:44:02 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> Example 1:
> 
> import std.stdio;
> 
> enum WindowSizes : QSize
> {
>     Minimum = QSize(10)
> }
> 
> struct QSize
> {
>     int store;
>     this(int x)
>     {
>         store = x + 10;
>     }
> }
> 
> void main()
> {
>     auto foo = WindowSizes.Minimum;
>     assert(foo.store == 10);  // What?
> 
>     auto bar = QSize(10);
>     assert(bar.store == 20);
> }
> 
> It appears the constructor is never called for the enum. It does field by field assignments instead, just take a look at this case:
> 
> import std.stdio;
> 
> enum WindowSizes : Inverted
> {
>     Minimum = Inverted(10, 20)
> }
> 
> struct Inverted
> {
>     int x;
>     int y;
>     this(int in_x, int in_y)
>     {
>         x = in_y;
>         y = in_x;
>     }
> }
> 
> void main()
> {
>     auto foo = WindowSizes.Minimum;
>     assert(foo.x == 10);
>     assert(foo.y == 20);
> 
>     auto bar = Inverted(10, 20);
>     assert(bar.x == 20);
>     assert(bar.y == 10);
> }
> 
> As can be seen, this could be a potential source of bugs. Should I file it?

Absolutely.

- Jonathan M Davis

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5460