[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2015-12-15 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=926

Jack Stouffer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
 CC||j...@jackstouffer.com
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX

--- Comment #9 from Jack Stouffer  ---
Remarking this as won't fix because it's a luxury D1 issue that no one really
has time for, and frankly, who honestly cares? No one uses D1 anymore and the
fact that a changelog entry is missing for something that came out eight years
ago now is not going to be fixed.

--


[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2012-01-30 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=926


Walter Bright  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com


--- Comment #8 from Walter Bright  2012-01-30 
11:27:08 PST ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Here's an idea: I'll have a look at it myself over the next few days.

I'll be happy to merge in any changes you suggest.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2012-01-30 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=926


Stewart Gordon  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
 Resolution|WONTFIX |
 AssignedTo|bugzi...@digitalmars.com|s...@iname.com


--- Comment #7 from Stewart Gordon  2012-01-30 08:55:26 PST ---
(In reply to comment #6)

> What matters is what the spec says and what the compiler does now. If someone
> wants to go through the compiler/spec diffs from years ago to see when things
> changed, that's fine and I'll fold in changelog changes if they present them,

The standard meaning of WONTFIX is "this issue is to stay as it is" not "I
personally can't be bothered/don't have time to deal with it".  The way to
indicate the latter is to leave it open and reassign it to nobody - this shows
that it's free for anybody to take the issue and work on it.

Here's an idea: I'll have a look at it myself over the next few days.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2012-01-29 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=926


Walter Bright  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||WONTFIX


--- Comment #6 from Walter Bright  2012-01-29 
10:29:25 PST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> The D1 spec allows what?

It allows implict conversion of an array of derived classes to an array of base
classes. Thomas quoted the relevant verbage.


> The spec and the changelog to contradict each other?

What matters is what the spec says and what the compiler does now. If someone
wants to go through the compiler/spec diffs from years ago to see when things
changed, that's fine and I'll fold in changelog changes if they present them,
but I've got a lot of current issues to address, and historical spelunking is
off the radar.


> In which DMD version was this misfeature revived, anyway?

I don't know. I agree it is a misfeature, but I am loathe to break existing D1
code at this point, so I believe it should stay as it is.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2012-01-29 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=926


Stewart Gordon  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords|accepts-invalid |
   Severity|enhancement |normal


--- Comment #5 from Stewart Gordon  2012-01-29 07:15:47 PST ---
The D1 spec allows what?

The spec and the changelog to contradict each other?

In which DMD version was this misfeature revived, anyway?

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2012-01-29 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=926


Walter Bright  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Version|unspecified |D1
   Severity|normal  |enhancement


--- Comment #4 from Walter Bright  2012-01-29 
02:10:38 PST ---
This is D1 only. D2 does not allow it.

The D1 spec allows it, and changing it would be an enhancement.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2011-01-08 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=926


Stewart Gordon  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P5  |P2
Version|D2  |unspecified
   Severity|critical|normal


--- Comment #3 from Stewart Gordon  2011-01-08 15:26:39 PST ---
The version, priority and severity changes just made make no sense at all.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2011-01-08 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=926


Andrei Alexandrescu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P2  |P5
 CC||and...@metalanguage.com
Version|unspecified |D2
 AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com
   Severity|normal  |critical


-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 926] Revival of implicit conversion from Derived[] to Base[] not noted in changelog

2009-02-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=926


s...@iname.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||s...@iname.com
 Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
  Component|DMD |www.digitalmars.com
 Resolution|INVALID |
Summary|Implicit conversion from|Revival of implicit
   |Derived[] to Base[] |conversion from Derived[] to
   ||Base[] not noted in
   ||changelog




--- Comment #2 from s...@iname.com  2009-02-24 09:30 ---
So the bug is that either:
(a) It was disallowed in 0.73 according to the changelog, but the spec itself
not updated.  The 'bug' that it didn't behave according to spec was
subsequently fixed, but Walter completely forgot about the time when the
anomaly was introduced.

(b) It was disallowed in 0.73, the spec updated, and then the reversion both in
the spec and in the compiler was inadvertently left out of the changelog.


--