dmd 1.048 and 2.033 releases

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 10/5/09 15:46, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 09:12:32 -0400, Denis Koroskin <2korden at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:55:49 +0400, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/5/09 13:49, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 03:54:22 -0400, Walter Bright
>>>> <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Another OSX 10.5 release :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyhow, this should work with gdb now, and has contract inheritance
>>>>> (finally).
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
>>>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.048.zip
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
>>>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.033.zip
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update.
>>>>
>>>> Excellent work! It looks like a lot of mundane bugs are getting fixed,
>>>> which is a good sign :)
>>>>
>>>> A couple questions:
>>>>
>>>> 1. "The result type of the typeid(type) is now the most derived
>>>> TypeInfo
>>>> class, rather than the TypeInfo base class" Why can't this be
>>>> propogated
>>>> to D1? I can't imagine code that depends on the return value being
>>>> typed
>>>> as TypeInfo that would not simply just work with the most derived
>>>> return
>>>> type...
>>>>
>>>> 2. A while ago, (I can't find the post, it may have been on reddit) you
>>>> mentioned that you were going to add property notation. Is that still
>>>> going to happen? I'm really looking forward to that, and if not, is
>>>> there a reason?
>>>
>>> There are some traces of it in the code:
>>> http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmd/changeset/195 search for "property".
>>>
>>>> -Steve
>>>
>>
>> int bar() @property
>> {
>> return 42;
>> }
>>
>> writeln(bar);
>>
>> Yay! :)
>
> Cool :)
>
> Unfortunately, this still compiles :(
>
> int bar()
> {
> return 42;
> }
>
> writeln("%d", bar);
>
> And this too:
>
> int bar() @property
> {
> return 42;
> }
>
> writeln("%d", bar());
>
> So it appears that @property is a noop for now, but is valid syntax.
>
> Also interesting from this revelation is that attributes are coming :D

I just hope that they also will be user defined.

> int bar() @blah
> {
> return 42;
> }
>
> #../dmd-2.033/linux/bin/dmd -w testme.d
> testme.d(8): valid attribute identifiers are property, not blah
>
> -Steve