int[char[]] a; int[immutable(char)[]] b; char[] s; int v1 = a[s]; // Fine int v2 = b[s]; // Fine a.remove(s); // Fine b.remove(s); // Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (s) of type char[] to string Can we be done with the compiler magic for the AA's?
The simplest solution is to just make it so that it's illegal to declare an AA with a key which isn't either a value type or immutable and make it so that _all_ functions or operators which take the key must take a type which is implicitly convertible to the key type (including its immutability). It _would_ break a fair bit of code though, I suspect. Still, it would be a fairly simple change to make in any code that it breaks, and it could be grandfathered in by making it a warning first.
A char[] can be safely compared with an immutable(char)[], so the code should be valid. Putting a value into an AA is another matter though. (In reply to comment #1) > The simplest solution is to just make it so that it's illegal to > declare an AA with a key which isn't either a value type or > immutable Agreed. > and make it so that _all_ functions or operators which take the key > must take a type which is implicitly convertible to the key type > (including its immutability). For functions that put data into an AA, yes. For lookup functions (retrieval and removal), it should be sufficient that it's a type that is implicitly convertible to the const version of the key type. (Just having an == operator with the key type isn't sufficient, as it needs to check the hash first.) For foreach, the only requirement should be that the key variable is of a type to which the key type can be implicitly converted. But this is a distinct matter from this bug.
THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GITHUB https://github.com/dlang/dmd/issues/18371 DO NOT COMMENT HERE ANYMORE, NOBODY WILL SEE IT, THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GITHUB