| Thread overview | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
January 07, 2015 Another init() bug, can we deprecate yet? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13806 For the lazy: BitArray has an init() method, which hides the property BitArray.init This, or something similar, appears every few months. Walter has said in the past that the ability to override init is a feature. As far as I can tell, no one is using it as a feature; it only seems to cause trouble. Can we just deprecate it? At the very least deprecate functions named init(). | ||||
January 07, 2015 Re: Another init() bug, can we deprecate yet? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Peter Alexander | On Wednesday, 7 January 2015 at 22:03:01 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote: > Can we just deprecate it? At the very least deprecate functions named init(). There's a check for that: https://github.com/Hackerpilot/Dscanner/blob/master/src/analysis/builtin_property_names.d | |||
January 07, 2015 Re: Another init() bug, can we deprecate yet? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Peter Alexander | On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 10:03:00PM +0000, Peter Alexander via Digitalmars-d wrote: > https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13806 > > For the lazy: BitArray has an init() method, which hides the property > BitArray.init > > This, or something similar, appears every few months. Walter has said in the past that the ability to override init is a feature. As far as I can tell, no one is using it as a feature; it only seems to cause trouble. > > Can we just deprecate it? At the very least deprecate functions named > init(). https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2854 Destroy! T -- You have to expect the unexpected. -- RL | |||
January 08, 2015 Re: Another init() bug, can we deprecate yet? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to H. S. Teoh | On Wednesday, 7 January 2015 at 23:31:30 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 10:03:00PM +0000, Peter Alexander via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13806
>>
>> For the lazy: BitArray has an init() method, which hides the property
>> BitArray.init
>>
>> This, or something similar, appears every few months. Walter has said
>> in the past that the ability to override init is a feature. As far as
>> I can tell, no one is using it as a feature; it only seems to cause
>> trouble.
>>
>> Can we just deprecate it? At the very least deprecate functions named
>> init().
>
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2854
>
> Destroy!
Thanks. Just to be clear, I'm advocating deprecating all user-defined init functions, not just BitArray (so we don't get into this situation again).
| |||
January 08, 2015 Re: Another init() bug, can we deprecate yet? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Peter Alexander | On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 09:46:16AM +0000, Peter Alexander via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Wednesday, 7 January 2015 at 23:31:30 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: > >On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 10:03:00PM +0000, Peter Alexander via Digitalmars-d wrote: > >>https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13806 > >> > >>For the lazy: BitArray has an init() method, which hides the > >>property BitArray.init > >> > >>This, or something similar, appears every few months. Walter has said in the past that the ability to override init is a feature. As far as I can tell, no one is using it as a feature; it only seems to cause trouble. > >> > >>Can we just deprecate it? At the very least deprecate functions > >>named init(). > > > >https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2854 > > > >Destroy! > > Thanks. Just to be clear, I'm advocating deprecating all user-defined init functions, not just BitArray (so we don't get into this situation again). Yes, but purging it from Phobos first is a first step towards that eventual goal. :-) T -- Береги платье снову, а здоровье смолоду. | |||
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation
Permalink
Reply