Code behaves incorrectly if it is compiled in std.functional

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d]

On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 15:30:24 +0000, Marc Schütz wrote:

> On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 15:09:21 UTC, ketmar wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 15:47:33 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/08/2015 03:11 PM, ketmar wrote:
>>>> so specifying two storage classes are sometimes valid and sometimes
>>>> invalid. a perfect consistency!
>>> 
>>> The compiler sometimes compiles the program and sometimes terminates
>>> with an error message instead. That's life.
>>
>> yeah. "you can't logically deduce it, you have to remember it!"
>> that's the way to success.
> 
> That's only if you're talking about the details of the grammar. But for
> everyday use (even advanced use!) of the language, these are not
> important. You _don't_ "have to remember it", because you simply don't
> need it. Noone forces you to write `auto const`, and it gives you no
> advantages over just `const`. But if you really feel an urge to use
> strange combinations of storage classes and type modifiers, just do it,
> and the compiler will tell you whether it's good or not. No need to
> remember anything. OTOH, if you encounter such a combination in someone
> else's code, it's still pretty obvious what it means. No problem there
> either.

i'll keep citing `foreach (auto i)` thingy. it can't be deduced by using 
the knowledge of other language constructs, it can be only remembered. 
the less things one can't deduce language has, the better.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20150609/8db10b7e/attachment.sig>