Manu Evans
Manu Evans
My imagine just doesn't light up at all with respect to the concern you raise. I can _kinda_ see your argument to prevent it applied to pointers and I'm sympathetic...
> [...] then removing that allowance will break legitimate code. > > If, on the other hand, we disallow this kind of code at the beginning, then no valid code...
I wouldn't say I'm bent out of shape, it was more of a meta-commentary on a broad issue that influences decision making on a detail like this. @WalterBright are you...
An alternative rule might be that the target type has the same `.sizeof` as the source type... I think that could catch a similar but broader set of mistakes. Rather...
Yes, like I said; "I think that could catch a similar but broader set of mistakes". I realise that `int` was arbitrary, but that demonstrates exactly why this suggestion works...
> Yeah, that's a good usage. I tried seeing how to do it without reinterpret cast, and it's not as nice. > > ```d > myPointer = cast(typeof(myPointer))(cast(size_t)myPointer | bitStuffingFlags);...
I think it's fair to expect people have at least basic knowledge of the language... D isn't meant to be javascript. The whole point of D from my perspective is...
I guess this will sit here forever? Should I click the merge button?
Oh dear. What a waste of everyone's time. It will just say exactly what he already wrote in the spec PR...
I just came here intending to log this bug. I use ethernet serial servers, so I need RTU over TCP, which isn't an option here it seems...?