[Bug 151] New: Pragma without ';' results in undefined symbols

[Stewart Gordon]

Chris Miller wrote:
> On Wed, 24 May 2006 12:31:15 -0400, Thomas Kuehne 
> <thomas-dloop at kuehne.cn> wrote:
> 
>> While
>> "pragma(lib, "ws2_32.lib") class Blah{}" [A]
>> is clearly illegal,
>> "pragma(lib, "ws2_32.lib") class Blah{};" [B]
>> is legal but buggy.
>> 
>> http://www.dstress.com/d/pragma.html :
>>> pragma(ident) declaration; // influence one declaration
> 
> Doesn't seem right, notice:
> 
> pragma(ident)   // influence block of declarations
> {   declaration;
>     declaration;
> }

Yes, that bit of the spec is rather loose.  It seems it was intended to 
illustrate, rather than to specify, with the semicolons there merely to 
make them look like those declarations that happen to end with one.

> doesn't have ";" after the block. Anyway, the way you say wouldn't be 
> consistent with other things, like "extern(C) void foo() {}" doesn't 
> need ";" after. Plus, would that extra ";" have any significance?
<snip>

The syntax for pragmas is incomplete in the spec.  But the trailing ";" 
in Thomas's snippet is separate from both the class definition and the 
pragma.  It's a null DeclDef, allowed by the spec only at module level. 
  It appears that the point is to lighten the load for people coming 
from C(++), where a semicolon is required after a struct, union, class 
or enum definition.

Stewart.