On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Stuart Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
> If a naked {} block doesn't have the obvious/traditional meaning then
> I assume that you'll issue a very stern compiler warning (error?) upon
> finding one.
I'm not sure what obvious/traditional meaning you expect, and I can't think
of any case where this proposal would create a problem with an empty block.
Can you give an example?
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
