post qualifier and template constraint limitation, is there a reason ?

deadalnix via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sat Jan 17 09:34:21 PST 2015


On Saturday, 17 January 2015 at 17:08:12 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> sure i have. i made alot of patches to the parser, so i know 
> how it
> is written. to make this work parser need to be changed not 
> less than
> to accept '@' before `pure`, `nothrow` and so on, and this 
> change was
> rejected due to added complexity for supporting it by devteam.
>

I'm sorry but this is not a good reason. It would be failry easy 
to add this in SDC's parser, so now what ? it tells nothing about 
the feature and everything about DMD's parser.

> as for "will not be used" -- you can use google to count 
> requests for
> this feature. the numbers will show you how much people miss it.
>
> i have no habit of writing tales from the faery world, you know.

Absence of information is not information.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list