On 4/10/13 5:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/10/2013 12:43 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Generally it does not, but is it actually not full of holes in this
case? Can
you give a short wrap-up of what the original language design is for type
checking delegate context pointers? We can only guess, because it is not
specified and much of what DMD does there is obviously buggy. In the
end, we'll
be left with three compiler front ends that implement three distinct
competing
designs.
Clearly, delegates should not be able to break purity, const, shared,
etc. Any setup that allows that is broken.
Yah, hence the holes :o). I think it's important to acknowledge that
problems in the language definition exist and problems in the language
implementation also exist. Both are important, but the former are more
so because fixing them makes it possible to fix many of the
implementation issues.
Andrei
