[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 RazvanN changed: What|Removed |Added CC||razvan.nitu1...@gmail.com --- Comment #11 from

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P2 |P3 --

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 --- Comment #10 from Vladimir Panteleev --- (In reply to timon.gehr from comment #6) > The compiler does not know whether there are any return statements in the > body when starting the analysis of a function because of conditional > compilation and

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 --- Comment #9 from Vladimir Panteleev --- (In reply to timon.gehr from comment #8) > What I'm saying is that you cannot short-circuit semantic analysis of > function bodies based on unknown information. How would

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 --- Comment #8 from timon.g...@gmx.ch --- (In reply to Vladimir Panteleev from comment #7) > (In reply to timon.gehr from comment #6) > > The compiler does not know whether there are any return statements in the > > body when starting the analysis of

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 Vladimir Panteleev changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 --- Comment #6 from timon.g...@gmx.ch --- (In reply to Vladimir Panteleev from comment #5) > (In reply to timon.gehr from comment #3) > > Currently, this is quite conservative. Analysis of any function is suspended > > if a function call with

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 --- Comment #5 from Vladimir Panteleev --- (In reply to timon.gehr from comment #3) > Currently, this is quite conservative. Analysis of any function is suspended > if a function call with unresolved return type is

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 Stewart Gordon s...@iname.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 timon.g...@gmx.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC||timon.g...@gmx.ch --- Comment #1

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 --- Comment #2 from Henning Pohl henn...@still-hidden.de 2013-08-12 16:44:06 PDT --- What do you mean with additional cases? The return types of these functions don't depend on each other. The code should compile just like this does: void

[Issue 10810] wrong forward reference error when using return type deduction and a cyclic call flow

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10810 --- Comment #3 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2013-08-12 19:01:18 PDT --- (In reply to comment #2) What do you mean with additional cases? The D programs that compile after the fix that wouldn't have compiled before. The return types of these