To help LDC/GDC

[Walter Bright]

On 4/10/2013 12:43 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> Generally it does not, but is it actually not full of holes in this case? Can
> you give a short wrap-up of what the original language design is for type
> checking delegate context pointers? We can only guess, because it is not
> specified and much of what DMD does there is obviously buggy. In the end, we'll
> be left with three compiler front ends that implement three distinct competing
> designs.

Clearly, delegates should not be able to break purity, const, shared, etc. Any 
setup that allows that is broken.