> --- Comment #0 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-07-28 14:49:50 PDT ---
> (cut) 
> By the way, what's the point in allowing/keeping ugly and error-prone function
> literals in D2?
> It's better for D2 to keep/allow only _one_ standard, clean and readable 
> syntax
> for functions pointers (and one for delegates, if necessary). Keeping C
> function pointer syntax or something similar in D2 causes troubles.

Um.. stop that.  Don't mix bug reports with discussion of only 
semi-related stuff together.  Don't use bugzilla as a discussion thread in 

Reply via email to