QtD 0.1 is out!

[Eldar Insafutdinov]

Walter Bright Wrote:

> Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
> > Now we have to make a manual init function called from class
> > constructors. I understand that allowing static consructors with
> > cyclic imports will make order of their execution undefined, but this
> > is acceptable and actually semantically doesn't break the idea of
> > cyclic imports. Otherwise in my opinion this behavior is
> > inconsistent..
> 
> One of the goals of D is to eliminate undefined behavior wherever 
> possible. In C++, the undefined order of static construction was a 
> source of many porting problems. I think it's better in the long run to 
> have a defined order, even if it means having to reorganize the code a bit.

in our case resources we are initializing are unrelated to the modules we are importing. and semantically the code is placed in modules as it should be.