http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan M Davis <[email protected]> 2013-08-18 23:30:45 PDT --- > What you're basically saying here is that the language is _defined_ by the > compiler, and consequently the compiler has no bugs. No, I'm not saying that the compiler has no bugs. If there is a disagreement between the spec, the compiler, or TDPL, then it has to be discussed which is correct, but in general, TDPL wins, then the compiler, and then the spec. Yes, the spec _should_ define what the language is, but it's not that precise or that complete, and the language is still under enough development that the spec has to change from time to time even if it's compeletely correct, and the reality of the matter is that the spec is often incorrect if nothing else because it frequently doesn't get updated properly when language design decisions are made, whereas the compiler almost always does get updated. It's not like the spec was written, and then a compiler was written to match it. The language has evolved over time, and on the whole, the compiler has defined what the language is, and Walter has defined what the language is supposed to be when questions come up. The spec attempts to define what the language is based on that, but it doesn't always manage it, primarily because it isn't maintained well enough. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
