[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

|--- |FIXED --- Comment #11 from Dlang Bot --- dlang/dmd pull request #15076 "Fix Issue 18493 - [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit" was merged into master: - 490c8a26f6563e86b9df3cd4180afc2e6c8bb08c by RazvanN7: Fix Issue 18493 - [betterC] Can't use aggre

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 --- Comment #10 from Dlang Bot --- @RazvanN7 created dlang/dmd pull request #15076 "Fix Issue 18493 - [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit" fixing this issue: - Fix Issue 18493 - [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postb

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 Mike Franklin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 github-bugzi...@puremagic.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

type with postblit https://github.com/dlang/druntime/commit/a2cabb8e668434521aff45f4d064fcf48780fb11 Merge pull request #2184 from JinShil/betterC_nothrow Fix Issue 18493 - [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit merged-on-behalf-of: Sebastian Wilzbach --

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 Mike Franklin changed: What|Removed |Added See Also|

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 --- Comment #7 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/dlang/dmd https://github.com/dlang/dmd/commit/8a33fb6c692d0b2c1f03ceeb65c28beaebd932a0 Add test for issue 18493 --

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 --- Comment #6 from Radu Racariu --- I though more about this and I think betterC should imply nothrow *only for* compiler generated code. Making betterC nothrow by default will change semantics and basically split the

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 --- Comment #5 from Radu Racariu --- Ideally -betterC should imply `nothrow`, and any lowered code should work with this assumption. What is important to keep in mind is that if you require `this(this)` to be annotated with

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 Mike Franklin changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 --- Comment #3 from Radu Racariu --- Declaring `C` as --- struct C { S s1; } --- makes the test case compile. --

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 Radu Racariu changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||industry --

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 --- Comment #2 from Radu Racariu --- Even more reduced test case: --- struct S { this(this) { } ~this() { } } struct C { S s1; S s2; } --- --

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 Radu changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|enhancement |blocker --- Comment #1 from

[Issue 18493] [betterC] Can't use aggregated type with postblit

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18493 Radu changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||betterC --