http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=52
Don changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=52
Walter Bright changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com
--- Comment #10
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=52
Don changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|spec|patch
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=52
--- Comment #8 from s...@iname.com 2009-04-07 06:25 ---
No. If you actually read this bug, you'll see that it isn't about lines 11 and
26, but about the fact that ambiguous function pointers are silently accepted.
The errors should be
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=52
--- Comment #7 from g...@nwawudu.com 2009-04-07 05:31 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> The example below does not compile...
The example in the issue description does not compile anymore. Has this issue
been fixed and is it ok to close t
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=52
--- Comment #6 from g...@nwawudu.com 2009-04-07 03:12 ---
The example below does not compile. Has this been fixed?
DMD v1.041
bug52.d(11): Error: expected 1 arguments, not 0
bug52.d(26): Error: expected 0 arguments, not 1
DMD v2.027
b
