https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dfj1es...@sneakemail.com
---
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #26 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2012-03-10 17:31:34 PST ---
An example of the problems this
avoids:http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.announcearticle_id=22649
Andrej Mitrovic:
I see you are
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #25 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-03-20 04:29:08 PDT ---
See also:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2504536/why-allow-concatenation-of-string-literals
--
Configure issuemail:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #24 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-22 12:01:40 PST ---
A recent note by Walter:
Andrei's right. This is not about making it right-associative. It is about
defining in the language that:
((a ~ b) ~ c)
is guaranteed
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #22 from Stewart Gordon s...@iname.com 2010-11-17 03:58:08 PST ---
(In reply to comment #21)
doesn't this solve that problem? a ~ (this ~ that)
It does. My point was that somebody might accidentally not add the brackets.
--
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
Stewart Gordon s...@iname.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||s...@iname.com
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #18 from Stewart Gordon s...@iname.com 2010-11-16 17:15:03 PST ---
(In reply to comment #17)
For example, if a is a string[], then a ~ this that and a ~ this ~
that
evaluate to different strings.
Different string arrays even.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
nfx...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nfx...@gmail.com
--- Comment #19
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #20 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-16 19:38:56 PST ---
(In reply to comment #19)
(In reply to comment #17)
Not that there's any real use case for this that anyway. And those rare
use cases
I use automatic joining all
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #16 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-11-13 23:58:35 PST ---
Sorry, missed out a line:
if (e1-op == TOKcat (e2-op == TOKstring || e2-op == TOKnull)
(((CatExp *)e1)-e2-op == TOKstring || ((CatExp *)e1)-e2-op
==
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #14 from Ellery Newcomer ellery-newco...@utulsa.edu 2010-11-13
19:26:18 PST ---
you don't need to mess with associativity rules, you just need to be able to
handle two or three ast cases:
1. (~ str str)ie str ~ str
2. (~
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #11 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-12 04:24:57 PST ---
Walter agrees:
http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.Darticle_id=121830
--
Configure issuemail:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #12 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-12 04:32:16 PST ---
A comment from Andrei Alexandrescu:
Walter, please don't forget to tweak the associativity rules: var ~ literal
~ literal concatenates literals first.
--
Configure
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #9 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-10 18:17:17 PST ---
Another bug caused in my code by that anti-feature:
unittest {
auto tests = [[, ], [12346, ], [he, H000],
[soundex, S532], [example, E251],
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #8 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-21 13:38:59 PDT ---
A particularly nice example of why untidy syntax easily leads to bugs (this
comes from two different sources of sloppiness of the D2 language):
enum string[5] data =
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #5 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-06-20 16:19:15 PDT ---
The error message for the missing ~ can be something like this (adapted from
the 'l' suffix is deprecated, use 'L' instead error message generated by the
usage of a 10l long
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
Ellery Newcomer ellery-newco...@utulsa.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #7 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-06-20 16:51:06 PDT ---
I know Python, but I hope D will become better than Python on this syntax
detail.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
Alexey Ivanov aifg...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aifg...@gmail.com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #1 from Alexey Ivanov aifg...@gmail.com 2010-02-18 14:35:32 PST
---
Created an attachment (id=571)
patch for parse.c
Vote++ and patch
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-02-18 14:55:40 PST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Created an attachment (id=571) [details]
patch for parse.c
Vote++ and patch
Thank you. But is DMD doing the joining with ~ at compile time? If
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
--- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-02-18 15:03:33 PST ---
Thank you. But is DMD doing the joining with ~ at compile time? If not, then
you can add that optimization to your patch (if you are able to).
And if you think it's
27 matches
Mail list logo
