On 9/26/2011 10:34 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:13:52 -0400, Mehrdad <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 9/26/2011 9:40 AM, Trass3r wrote:
Well, it looks like having declared a non-static opCall makes the
automatically generated constructor for the struct unusable - which
may or may not be a bug
I do think it's a bug. Only a static opCall should interfere with
the constructor.
Yeah I agree -- should I file it as one?
Might want to add this case (as I think it is important, and doesn't
yet seem to have an exact duplicate report) to bug 6036. Looks like
Kenji is on the case, and he usually comes up with a pull request :)
-Steve
Done!
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6036
