On Sunday, 12 December 2021 at 20:55:49 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Sunday, 12 December 2021 at 19:44:17 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
> On Thursday, 9 December 2021 at 16:30:28 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> I would not recommend weaker typing, as it would be trivial to get stronger typing by simply supporting f"this $will become a string" and i"this $will become a list".
That would have the problem that confusing i"" and f"" could lead to SQL injections and related problems. The improvement over using i"".text is almost nonexistent.
How could you confuse them?
In cases like this, for example?
void func(string str);
void func(Is...)(Is interpString)
if (isInterpString!Is);
string value = "bla";
func(f"some $bla bla"); // calls first one
func(i"some $bla bla"); // calls second one
If I understand your suggestion correctly, both would compile, but be handled differently. It's a one-keystroke difference and people will conflate i"" and f"" for sure and it could lead to serious vulnerabilities. Carefully crafted func can make one an error, but not so carefully made ones might not. It becomes a hard(er)-to-use-correctly issue.
> The type system would prevent it.
Only if it is assisted by the programmer. If the type system could distinguish all the cases, i.e. there is no case where f"" and i"" work both, you wouldn't need the distinction in the first place. One could do a best effort approach, but I agree that weak typing is bad.
Permalink
Reply
