[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 Mathias LANG changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|D1 D2 |D2 --

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||9953 --- Comment #16 from

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 --- Comment #15 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2013-03-19 04:51:15 PDT --- It passes if you specify the type in the const/enum. The reason is, that in declaration.c, VarDeclaration::semantic(), we see this code: else if (storage_class

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 nfx...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 nfx...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code --- Comment #12 from

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 --- Comment #11 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-09-01 12:34:43 PDT --- Btw. this is a CTFE problem, and the first example is in D1. I don't know what the hell is with D2 and immutable and implicit dups, but to get the same behavior on D2, replace

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|wrong-code |performance --- Comment #9

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 --- Comment #4 from Sobirari Muhomori dfj1es...@sneakemail.com 2010-07-28 12:04:59 PDT --- Shouldn't literals be immutable and the code - invalid? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 --- Comment #5 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-07-28 12:29:57 PDT --- (In reply to comment #4) Shouldn't literals be immutable and the code - invalid? I think they *should*. I argued strongly for immutable array literals. But I lost. So

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 --- Comment #6 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-07-28 13:05:25 PDT --- It's not valid. This is a systems programming language, and the compiler can't just randomly insert memory allocations. What if you wrote a kernel in D? I insist on the wrong-code

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 --- Comment #8 from Sobirari Muhomori dfj1es...@sneakemail.com 2010-07-28 19:57:40 PDT --- Well... there can be a problem with immutable literals because immutability is transitive... hmm... Even if literals aren't immutable, compiler can

[Issue 4397] const/CTFE does not work

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4397 nfx...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|D1 const/CTFE does not work |const/CTFE does not work ---