http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3192





--- Comment #4 from Don <clugd...@yahoo.com.au>  2009-07-20 02:38:02 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> For inferring function return type, the nextOf() is null.

It'd be great if you could put that in a comment in the definition of nextOf().
I'd never been sure when it's supposed to be non-null, it's one of the least
obvious things in the code. Should it become non-null in a later semantic pass?

Also a comment about the cto, ito, sto members of type would be really useful.
When should they be non-null?
In a great many of the compiler bugs I've looked at, they're null, but I've not
been sure whether the bug is that they're null, or that other code is not
dealing with the case that they're null.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to