Biggest Issue with D - Definition and Versioning

Robert Clipsham robert at octarineparrot.com
Sun Jan 15 06:47:57 PST 2012


On 15/01/2012 14:26, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> "Michel Fortin"<michel.fortin at michelf.com>  wrote in message
> news:jetbld$23qt$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> Looks good in theory, but in practice this approach hasn't worked very
>> well for pull request number 3.
>>
>
> I may have mentioned this before, but there are a couple of things that make
> me think pull 3 shouldn't be merged as is. (Even if it was made merge-ready)
>
> 1. The patch tries (and in some places, doesn't try) to match implicit
> conversion and template deduction behaviour for pointers and arrays which
> are badly defined and in some cases don't make any sense.  I'd prefer to get
> those sorted out before adding a third referencey TypeNext to dmd.
>
> 2. The addition of head() means a huge amount of changes that aren't really
> necessary.  Most of the changes are insertions of calls to this function,
> which introduces quite a bit of mess and potential for easy bugs if someone
> forgets to use it.
>
> I don't know if Walter has a similar list of reservations he's keeping to
> himself, or just hasn't gotten around to it yet.  Hopefully I'll find some
> time to work on these issues (or somebody else will).

Might be worth adding this as a comment on the pull request!

-- 
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list