immutable bug?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 1/12/14 12:35 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 01/12/2014 07:10 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 1/12/14 8:46 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>> "Andrei Alexandrescu"  wrote in message
>>> news:laugbo$2jcq$3 at digitalmars.com...
>>>> Yep. Has this been placed in bugzilla? It's rather hi-pri.
>>>
>>> If this isn't https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11503 - it
>>> most likely has the same cause.
>>
>> Put $150 on this.
>> https://www.bountysource.com/issues/1325974-type-system-breaking-caused-by-implicit-conversion-for-the-value-returned-from-pure-function
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrei
>
> This issue was trivial, and yet was assigned a higher bounty than e.g.
> fixing CTFE performance, which requires a large investment as far as I
> understand. This raises the question of how bountied issues are
> selected.

I select them with a focus on impact. Clearly the process could be 
improved.

  There are other serious problems with the type system
> implementation, eg:
>
> https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9149
> https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10376
> https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9148

Thanks, will take those under advisement. FWIW there's been a thread 
taking suggestions.

> On a related note, I think it makes no sense to put a bounty on the
> "Object not const-correct" issue. What would someone be required to do
> in order to get the bounty for that issue?

Make sure we have a complete solution for invoking Object's methods 
against const and immutable Objects?


Andrei