On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 22:38:33 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 22:16:38 UTC, tsbockman wrote:
Yes. The path to fix 259 is clear, and Lionello Lunesu and
myself have already done most of the work.
14835 is a blocker due to the nature of the solution that
Walter and Andrei approved (which I agree is the right one);
an independent implementation would run in to the same problem.
Only if that blocker is dealt with - otherwise it's just wasted