playing around with D

[BCS]

Pragma wrote:
> BCS wrote:
> 
>> Reply to Walter,
>>
>>> BCS wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why do the static asserts get processed later?
>>>>
>>>> I'd expect that having them get processed sooner would make things
>>>> work nicer.
>>>>
>>> There's always that chicken-and-egg problem of forward references.
>>>
>>
>> Ah!!
>>
>> Wild thought: I know it's to late to do this for for DMD but, what 
>> would the problems be of doing a lazy evaluation of the AST?
>> I'm thinking something like; process the declarations and statements 
>> in order (starting at the module level) and when you find a symbol you 
>> don't know about go looking for it.
>>
>>
> 
> Interesting idea.  Maybe I'm just naive, but how would this be any 
> different than just adding an additional semantic pass, while relaxing 
> DMD's tendency to barf on unresolved symbols - or is that what you're 
> proposing?
> 

You can't do it in a constant number of passes because asserts can 
depend on templates that depend on asserts that depend on templates ...