q{ @ }

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2011 11:05 Peter Alexander wrote:
> On 26/09/11 8:30 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Monday, September 26, 2011 12:09 Peter Alexander wrote:
> >> On 26/09/11 2:47 AM, Bernard Helyer wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:10:53 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
> >>>> @ is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.
> >>> 
> >>> Yep, so Peter's stumbled on a bug. Bugzilla that shit, Peter! :D
> >> 
> >> Well, if outdated documentation is a bug, then I suppose so.
> >> 
> >> Done
> >> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6734
> >> 
> >> And done!
> >> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pul
> >> l/2 7
> > 
> > There is specifically a category in bugzilla for issues with the website,
> > and the online documentation is included in that.
> > 
> > - Jonathan M Davis
> 
> I selected that category.
> 
> "Component: websites"
> 
> When you select that component it gives you a description:
> 
> "Component Description
> Problems with the contents of www.digitalmars.com and
> www.d-programming-language.org, including the language specification"
> 
> If that wasn't the right place for the bug then perhaps it shouldn't say
> that it is! Also, where is the other category that you speak of? I can't
> see it anywhere.

That _is_ the right category. You seemed to be in doubt about whether 
documentation bugs went in Bugzilla, so I pointed out that they do. If they're 
spec bugs (as opposed to bugs in druntime's or Phobos' documentation, which
go under druntime and Phobos respectively), they go  under the websites
component. What you did was correct.

- Jonathan M Davis