On Saturday, 28 February 2015 at 05:57:19 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Saturday, 28 February 2015 at 03:49:04 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 20:13:31 +0000, weaselcat wrote:
Are op* considered reserved member names?
no. that's just the "we can break your code, and you can't
break ours!"
it's funny how the argument "we will not break user's code"
pops up even
for breaking invalid code, but completely ignored for
perfectly valid
code not forbidden by the specs.
I think this is justified to break the code here, but I share
the irritation in front of the inconsistency.
I agree, as, well, this is starting to look pretty grotesque...
The druntime/phobos 2.067 are breaking every piece of software
out there that relies on core.sync or concurrency.scheduler, vibe
and tango included.
I admit that breakages coming from phobos' changes are pretty
different from a breakages coming from compiler changes, but we
are talking about the runtime library also.
Oh well, who cares: my backlog of D code tasks at work is too
long to start complaining... let's go back to the code...
---
Paolo
