q{ @ }

[Peter Alexander]

On 27/09/11 9:02 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> 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 Well, if outdated documentation is a bug, then I suppose so.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

Ah ok, my bad. I though that you were implying that I had put it in the 
wrong place!