[Issue 6278] Regression(2.054 beta): 'in' contract inheritance doesn't work with safe code

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6278 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #

[Issue 6278] Regression(2.054 beta): 'in' contract inheritance doesn't work with safe code

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6278 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Platform|Other |All --- Comment #9 from yebblies 2012-02-0

[Issue 6320] non-pure constructor can be called using new

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6320 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.

[Issue 6278] Regression(2.054 beta): 'in' contract inheritance doesn't work with safe code

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6278 --- Comment #10 from Walter Bright 2012-02-01 00:46:33 PST --- (In reply to comment #9) > Exceptions thrown in contracts are supposed to be recoverable, No, they are supposed to exit the program. The thing with in contracts is not that they'r

[Issue 6278] Regression(2.054 beta): 'in' contract inheritance doesn't work with safe code

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6278 --- Comment #11 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-02-01 00:54:26 PST --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/dc7916071b60739dcc8c09e43ff3da5218b42ff

[Issue 6278] Regression(2.054 beta): 'in' contract inheritance doesn't work with safe code

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6278 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|regression |normal --- Comment #12 from Walter Bri

[Issue 785] Make 'cent' and 'ucent' syntactically valid pending implementation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=785 --- Comment #20 from Andrei Alexandrescu 2012-02-01 00:58:00 PST --- Focus, that's what we lose. 1. There's no real request for cent and ucent. 2. This "let's add a filler doing nothing, discuss it ad nauseam, and consider implement later" is

[Issue 785] Make 'cent' and 'ucent' syntactically valid pending implementation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=785 --- Comment #21 from yebblies 2012-02-01 20:12:24 EST --- With respect, Andrei, it's my time to waste. A lot more time has been wasted on arguing about it than the 5 minutes it took for me to make a patch that fixed it. 128 bit integer types h

[Issue 785] Make 'cent' and 'ucent' syntactically valid pending implementation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=785 --- Comment #22 from Andrei Alexandrescu 2012-02-01 01:17:09 PST --- It's great you want to work on this. It's this particular patch that I have difficulty backing: it future proofs code that doesn't exist, for a feature that doesn't exist eith

[Issue 5851] Ambiguous alias this accepted.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5851 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC|

[Issue 4041] Error with ref or auto ref return from opOpAssign

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4041 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 6504] Regression(2.041): "str" ~ [arr] allows string literal to be modified

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6504 Don changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID

[Issue 4149] refs displayed as pointers in gdb

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4149 --- Comment #14 from Leandro Lucarella 2012-02-01 02:22:04 PST --- (In reply to comment #13) > It's unrelated to pull 526 which fixed #4180. I'm talking about the comment 2 by Brad: > Depends on if gc implies c, c++, or 'as much as is suppor

[Issue 3389] gdb: using -gc is mandatory but not well documented

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3389 Leandro Lucarella changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Issue 7416] New: 2.058 regression: fails to instantiate a constrained function template with a nested function

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7416 Summary: 2.058 regression: fails to instantiate a constrained function template with a nested function Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status:

[Issue 6029] Regression(2.053): DMD stack overflow with invalid alias this

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6029 --- Comment #6 from yebblies 2012-02-01 22:41:31 EST --- > int s = A; // Error: type A has no value + stack overflow I still can't reproduce this. What version/os? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=ema

[Issue 7416] 2.058 regression: fails to instantiate a constrained function template with a nested function

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7416 Don changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au Severity|normal

[Issue 7417] New: One-definition rule for version specification - allow version expressions

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7417 Summary: One-definition rule for version specification - allow version expressions Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severi

[Issue 6681] bogus duplicate union initialization or overlapping initialization errors

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6681 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from yebb

[Issue 6473] Stack overflow with struct destructor as default parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6473 Trass3r changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 6681] struct constructor call is converted to struct literal that breaks union initialization

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6681 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Platform|Other |All Summary|bogus duplicate union

[Issue 2025] Inconsistent rules for instantiating templates with a tuple parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2025 --- Comment #6 from Stewart Gordon 2012-02-01 04:16:53 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) > As Walter said, so that T:int would be considered a better match. It is a > hack > in the compiler that I'm not particularly fond of. What has a "bette

[Issue 6681] struct constructor call is converted to struct literal that breaks union initialization

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6681 Don changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #4 from Don 2

[Issue 785] Make 'cent' and 'ucent' syntactically valid pending implementation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=785 --- Comment #23 from Stewart Gordon 2012-02-01 04:21:17 PST --- (In reply to comment #20) > 2. This "let's add a filler doing nothing, discuss it ad nauseam, and consider > implement later" is an utter waste of time. If someone really wants they

[Issue 3927] array.length++; is an error, but ++array.length compiles

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3927 Don changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic CC|

[Issue 2025] Inconsistent rules for instantiating templates with a tuple parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2025 --- Comment #7 from yebblies 2012-02-01 23:32:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) > What has a "better match" to do with anything? (int) matches the pattern (T) > perfectly - no conversion, implicit or explicit. True, (T: int) is a more > spe

[Issue 785] Make 'cent' and 'ucent' syntactically valid pending implementation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=785 --- Comment #24 from Stewart Gordon 2012-02-01 04:36:09 PST --- Moreover, when we finally get the types, there will still be users on older compilers (DM or third-party, possibly commercial), even some on platforms for which an up-to-date compil

[Issue 2025] Inconsistent rules for instantiating templates with a tuple parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2025 --- Comment #8 from Stewart Gordon 2012-02-01 04:43:27 PST --- (In reply to comment #7) > more specialized == better match. That is how template type deduction works. But there's no (T : int) version of this template. We have two templates t

[Issue 785] Make 'cent' and 'ucent' syntactically valid pending implementation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=785 --- Comment #25 from yebblies 2012-02-01 23:44:50 EST --- (In reply to comment #24) > Moreover, when we finally get the types, there will still be users on older > compilers (DM or third-party, possibly commercial), even some on platforms for >

[Issue 2025] Inconsistent rules for instantiating templates with a tuple parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2025 --- Comment #9 from yebblies 2012-02-01 23:55:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > more specialized == better match. That is how template type deduction > > works. > > But there's no (T : int) version of this te

[Issue 6681] struct constructor call is converted to struct literal that breaks union initialization

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6681 --- Comment #5 from yebblies 2012-02-02 00:02:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) > Not exactly. It's a compiler structural problem: there's no way to specify a > struct literal with missing fields. Struct static initializers can do it, but > s

[Issue 4241] duplicate union initialization error doesn't give a file location

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4241 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC|

[Issue 4241] duplicate union initialization error doesn't give a file location

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4241 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from yebb

[Issue 2025] Inconsistent rules for instantiating templates with a tuple parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2025 --- Comment #10 from Stewart Gordon 2012-02-01 05:27:34 PST --- (In reply to comment #9) > For (T : int) to be preferred over (T), it must return a worse > match level for the unspecialized parameter. Currently it will > return MATCHconvert

[Issue 6905] ref acts as auto ref when return type is missing

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6905 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|Other

[Issue 2025] Inconsistent rules for instantiating templates with a tuple parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2025 --- Comment #11 from yebblies 2012-02-02 00:42:20 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) > So MATCHexact means "the pattern can be matched only by this exact set of > arguments", and MATCHconvert means "this is one of various sets of arguments > tha

[Issue 2254] Size of executable almost triples

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2254 Vladimir Panteleev changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WORKSFORME |FIXED --- Comment #34 from Vladim

[Issue 6771] Jagged array and init causing DMD to take a LONG time to compile.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6771 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 2396] -O causes very long execution time on foreach loop of large array of structs

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2396 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dsim...@yahoo.com --- Comment #6 from yebbl

[Issue 5684] Extremely show compile times with large tuples with -O -inline

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5684 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 6643] Very slow compilation for large switch() using -O and -inline

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6643 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 2396] -O causes very long execution time on foreach loop of large array of structs

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2396 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||damian...@hotmail.co.uk --- Comment #5 from

[Issue 2396] -O causes very long execution time on foreach loop of large array of structs

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2396 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||beiri...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from yebb

[Issue 2025] Inconsistent rules for instantiating templates with a tuple parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2025 --- Comment #12 from Stewart Gordon 2012-02-01 06:39:13 PST --- (In reply to comment #11) > No, MATCHconvert means 'match with implicit conversions'. These are the same > match levels used for normal function argument matching. int is a type.

[Issue 783] Cannot use an array w/ const or variable index as new[] size argument.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=783 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC|

[Issue 2025] Inconsistent rules for instantiating templates with a tuple parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2025 --- Comment #13 from yebblies 2012-02-02 01:51:55 EST --- (In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > > No, MATCHconvert means 'match with implicit conversions'. These are the > > same > > match levels used for normal function arg

[Issue 6681] struct constructor call is converted to struct literal that breaks union initialization

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6681 --- Comment #6 from Don 2012-02-01 07:13:36 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Not exactly. It's a compiler structural problem: there's no way to specify a > > struct literal with missing fields. Struct static initi

[Issue 1124] inconsistent: "<" calls opCmp(typeof(this) o); but array.sort calls opCmp(Object o)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1124 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 1457] array extension member syntax confused with local member functions

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1457 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 2344] Two wrong lookups for array functions

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2344 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wbax...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from yebbl

[Issue 2307] (D1 only) Cannot use explicitly instantiated template function with array property syntax

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2307 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|x86

[Issue 2712] error with passing an array slot as another array length to new

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2712 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 783] Cannot use an array w/ const or variable index as new[] size argument.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=783 --- Comment #5 from yebblies 2012-02-02 02:28:52 EST --- *** Issue 2712 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because

[Issue 3221] (D1 only) Can't use property syntax with ufcs

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3221 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid CC|

[Issue 3626] alias this prevents appending to array

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3626 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 3501] (D1 only) "is null" comparison should be disallowed for fixed-size arrays

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3501 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid CC|

[Issue 5718] Can't demangle symbol defined inside unittest block

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5718 Kenji Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull --- Comment #5 from Kenji Hara 2012

[Issue 3683] Linker error on certain array expressions when using -release and -inline

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3683 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 5592] Previous definition different: __arrayExpSliceMulSliceAddass_d

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5592 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||eriatark...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from y

[Issue 5570] 64 bit C ABI not followed for passing structs and complex numbers as function parameters

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5570 Trass3r changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mrmoc...@gmx.de --- Comment #5 from Trass3r

[Issue 3812] Missing line number for implicit cast of variadic function to array

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3812 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC|

[Issue 3826] init of fixed sized arrays

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3826 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 3927] array.length++; is an error, but ++array.length compiles

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3927 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|x86

[Issue 6681] struct constructor call is converted to struct literal that breaks union initialization

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6681 --- Comment #7 from yebblies 2012-02-02 03:38:36 EST --- Ok, I'll take a look at it tomorrow unless you want it. I know there are at least two places it checks for overlapping union initialization, one in expression.c and one somewhere in the

[Issue 3389] gdb: using -gc is mandatory but not well documented

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3389 --- Comment #4 from d...@dawgfoto.de 2012-02-01 11:27:20 PST --- Thats a wrong comparision because neither -g not -ggdb make the compiler fake C++ debug information as C. The -gc flag is a hack to masquerade as C which should not be the default

[Issue 7418] New: Overloading doesn't work with aliases declared inside templates

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7418 Summary: Overloading doesn't work with aliases declared inside templates Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

[Issue 3389] gdb: using -gc is mandatory but not well documented

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3389 --- Comment #5 from d...@dawgfoto.de 2012-02-01 11:34:57 PST --- GDB already has D specific extensions (demangling and arrays). Using -g makes use of them, -gc does not. There won't be D specific DWARF extensions any time soon. What we wanted to

[Issue 7396] Indicate default alignment with 0.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7396 --- Comment #21 from d...@dawgfoto.de 2012-02-01 11:42:18 PST --- >I think it would also make sense to disallow any align(n) value greater than >align(16) for 32bit, and possibly align(32) for 64bit platforms. Don't do that. GCC can provide arb

[Issue 7419] New: [2.058/CTFE] Constructor of struct is overwritten inside a unittest with -inline

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7419 Summary: [2.058/CTFE] Constructor of struct is overwritten inside a unittest with -inline Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW

[Issue 7420] New: Duplicate "cannot be read at compile time" error messages

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7420 Summary: Duplicate "cannot be read at compile time" error messages Product: D Version: D1 & D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

[Issue 7421] New: std.getopt does not work with shared strings

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7421 Summary: std.getopt does not work with shared strings Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Compon

[Issue 4729] std.algorithm: strange iota behaviour

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4729 Brad Anderson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||e...@gnuk.net --- Comment #3 from Brad

[Issue 7419] [2.058/CTFE] Constructor of struct is overwritten inside a unittest with -inline

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7419 Don changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au AssignedTo|nob...@p

[Issue 6504] Regression(2.041): "str" ~ [arr] allows string literal to be modified

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6504 --- Comment #4 from Walter Bright 2012-02-01 14:05:45 PST --- I found out it causes the seg fault after posting last night. I don't quite understand your suggestion. Do you have a fix that can be pulled? I did try just not constant folding "s

[Issue 783] Cannot use an array w/ const or variable index as new[] size argument.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=783 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|patch |pull CC|

[Issue 5718] Can't demangle symbol defined inside unittest block

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5718 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 7002] std.path needs a isValidFilePath function

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7002 Lars T. Kyllingstad changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzi...@kyllingen.net --- Comme

[Issue 5718] Can't demangle symbol defined inside unittest block

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5718 --- Comment #7 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-02-01 14:32:50 PST --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/686f53f6d2d373ad13ea854b52e924fd7

[Issue 7001] std.path.baseName and isValidFilename wrong documentation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7001 Lars T. Kyllingstad changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 6068] std.path has some issues for Windows user

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6068 Lars T. Kyllingstad changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 7002] std.path needs a isValidFilePath function

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7002 Andrej Mitrovic changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 6790] buildPath using std.path.curdir segfaults

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6790 --- Comment #6 from Lars T. Kyllingstad 2012-02-01 14:41:35 PST --- Have you tried this with DMD 2.057, and if so, are you still experiencing the same problem? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ---

[Issue 5570] 64 bit C ABI not followed for passing structs and complex numbers as function parameters

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5570 Graham changed: What|Removed |Added CC||grahamc00...@yahoo.co.uk --- Comment #6 from

[Issue 6560] Exponentiation operator ^^ doesn't work for complex numbers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6560 Lars T. Kyllingstad changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 7422] New: Regression(master): ICE with template function and if statement

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7422 Summary: Regression(master): ICE with template function and if statement Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: regres

[Issue 7294] [Regression] No warning when escaping local reference type variables

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7294 --- Comment #1 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-02-01 17:23:12 PST --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/28324c5c1226571f2ee96eebee5fd3ad09ebe031

[Issue 7294] [Regression] No warning when escaping local reference type variables

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7294 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 3686] common type of imaginary and non-imaginary should be complex

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3686 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|patch | Version|2.038

[Issue 4031] Should be able to access const value-type globals from pure functions

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4031 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|patch |pull Status|NEW

[Issue 5481] Support deprecated("message")

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5481 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|patch |pull --- Comment #3 from yebblies 2012-02-

[Issue 3994] Wrong line numbers inside AA/Array initializers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3994 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 977] Wrong line number reported for a missing comma in an array initializer within a struct initializer

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=977 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cbkbbej...@mailinator.com Bug 977 depends on

[Issue 977] Expressions inside a struct or array initializer get wrong line number

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=977 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|x86

[Issue 3995] Can't access array/AA from function literal defined inside the array/AA's initializer

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3995 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|Other

[Issue 4298] Constant array translated to unnecessary array literal creation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4298 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 4378] Array Literals as Default Field Initializers Shared Across Instances.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4378 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 2947] Array literal changeable if part of class.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2947 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dsim...@yahoo.com --- Comment #2 from yebbl

[Issue 2356] array literal as non static initializer generates horribly inefficient code.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2356 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsi...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from yebbli

[Issue 4426] assert(condition, string) fails in std.array.back

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4426 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

opDispatch returning this not working in a hierarchy

Hi, I don't know if this is really a bug or some gotcha of the language that I don't get. I'm sorry if it happens to be the later. When I run this simple program class DispatchBase { auto opDispatch( string m, Args... )( Args args ) { writefln( "Tried to call %s", m ); re

  1   2   >