Time for Phobos CTFE-ability unittests...right? RIGHT?

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.1576.1310513383.14074.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
> On 2011-07-12 16:17, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> I don't understand what strip() could be doing to break CTFE anyway?
>
> Don has been making huge changes to CTFE. Stuff that didn't used to 
> compile,
> now complie. Stuff which compiled but shouldn't have now doesn't compile.
> There's probably stuff which used to compile and should still compile 
> which
> doesn't compile now too. But with all of those changes, I'm not sure that 
> it's
> at all reasonable to expect CTFE-ability to be stable. It should be 
> heading in
> that direction, but I'm not sure how stable Don considers it. Certainly, 
> strip
> could be failing for a perfectly legitimate reason, or it could be a bug. 
> I
> have no idea. But with all of the changes that have been being made to 
> CTFE,
> I'm not at all surprised if stuff has quit working. There's probably more 
> that
> works now that didn't before, but with all of the recent changes, breakage
> doesn't surprise me one bit.
>

I definitely expected that in 2.053, since that's the version that had the 
CTFE overhaul. But it's not being re-overhauled in each version after 
2.053 - just bugfixes and added features. So at this point, I think it's 
reasonable to expect that any CTFE changes that break Phobos code should be 
fixed before release, even if only a temporary fix, in either the CTFE 
engine or in the Phobos code that was broken.