http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4322
Don changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4322
Brad Roberts changed:
What|Removed |Added
Platform|x86_64 |x86
--- Comment #7 from Brad Roberts 2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4322
Graham Fawcett changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #664 is|0 |1
obsolete|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4322
--- Comment #5 from Graham Fawcett 2010-06-16
12:31:07 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> That's too general, the error message is important in other places. I think
> the
> correct fix for the bug, is to allow a void initializer to be used i
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4322
--- Comment #4 from Graham Fawcett 2010-06-16
06:39:19 PDT ---
Created an attachment (id=664)
proposed patch
When initializing an array, this patch tests whether the initializer
is a VoidInitializer, and if so, avoids the toExpression() call.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4322
Don changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
--- Comment #3 from Don 2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4322
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc
--- Com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4322
--- Comment #1 from Graham Fawcett 2010-06-15
13:15:09 PDT ---
FWIW, removing line 100 in init.c allows simple examples to
compile and run correctly. Of course I'm not 100% clear on why the
error message was there in the first place. :)
diff
