--- Comment #2 from Don <> 2011-03-18 23:31:18 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I definitely like this idea, but I am a bit worried that it will be somewhat
> buggy if integrated at present. I believe that there are at least a couple of
> bugs (such as bug# 3833 ) related delegates not dealing with attributes such 
> as
> const and pure properly, and you can end up with attributes being ignored when
> they shouldn't be. That doesn't necessarily mean that this shouldn't be
> integrated right now, but it _does_ mean that the result could be buggy.

Bug 3833 is totally unrelated to this. I have looked at all bugs which use the
word "lazy" and none influence this. 
I've also looked at all open bugs which use the word "delegate" and also failed
to find anything which influence this one.
Bug 1818 is more related, but still isn't a problem.

The main reason that none of those existing bugs cause problems is that
enhancement bug 809 has NOT been accepted and "fixed". This means that although
'lazy' is internally implemented using delegates, there are very few places in
the compiler where that fact is exposed. It stays as a lazy parameter almost
all of the time, which isolates it from the other issues.

Also worth noting: the patch fixes bug 5475, and would make fixing bug 5476

Configure issuemail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to