To help LDC/GDC

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 4/10/13 5:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> 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.

Yah, hence the holes :o). I think it's important to acknowledge that 
problems in the language definition exist and problems in the language 
implementation also exist. Both are important, but the former are more 
so because fixing them makes it possible to fix many of the 
implementation issues.

Andrei