How about a 100% CTFE?

[deadalnix]

Le 08/11/2011 14:54, Gor Gyolchanyan a écrit :
>> Which assert will fail ? Does one will fail ? Note that two different instances of the compiler will compile b and c, and they are exscluded of one another import tree so each instance isn't aware of the other.
>
> Both will succeed and on both cases a will be 1 because both run
> independently. It's similar to asking if two different runs of the
> same program, which increment a global variable will see each others'
> results. The answer is: no.
>

Ok I seen your point. The problem is that a is a global variable and is 
incremented 2 times. But at the end, it will ends up that it is 
incremented only one time. Maybe 0.

I think this behaviour should be avoided because of the oinconsistency 
of what is happening at compile time and what you get as a result at run 
time. Some limitation should be added to the solution to not end up in 
thoses kind of behaviour IMO.

>> YOU are comming with a solution, YOU have to explain how it solves every problems. Everything else is flawed logic.
>
> Nothing ever solves every problem. That's a very unwise thing to say
> for someone, who claims to be logical. problems come and go depending
> on how the features are used. Each problem (or bunches of problems)
> must be dealt with explicitly (using inductive logic to account for
> other possible problems). As i said before, if you have problems, i'll
> help resolve them. If i don't - i'll withdraw my proposal.

Sorry my mistake, I didn't express myself the right way. I should have 
saud how it solve or do not solve every problems. Obviously, the 
solution to every problem usually do not exists.

The point is that every problems related to the solution must be 
considered to know if the solution is really solving something usefull 
and if its drawback (problem that are not solved or created by the given 
solution).