[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 --- Comment #9 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 20:50:21 PDT --- (In reply to comment #8) Note: Unfortunately, current dmd does not support parameter type inference + type-safe variadisc like follows. //delegate (self,

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 --- Comment #8 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2012-01-01 05:56:47 PST --- (In reply to comment #7) One more thing - the example in the book reads: obj.addMethod(sayHello, Variant(Dynamic, Variant[]...) {

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 --- Comment #2 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2011-12-31 00:40:00 PST --- (In reply to comment #1) This is not the delegate literal type deduction problem. It is a trivial mismatching of delegate types. This is the

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 --- Comment #3 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2011-12-31 01:01:24 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) I think (and perhaps I'm wrong) that the signature with ... and the one without must be equivalent. The ... makes a difference only in

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au ---

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 timon.g...@gmx.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC||timon.g...@gmx.ch --- Comment #5

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Issue 7135] [tdpl] Multiple delegate-related issues (literal syntax, @system deduction)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7135 --- Comment #1 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2011-12-30 23:28:51 PST --- This is not the delegate literal type deduction problem. It is a trivial mismatching of delegate types. This is the reduced code to explain the problem. struct