typedef alive and well?

[Steve Teale]

On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 20:47:48 +0100, Marco Leise wrote:

> Am 03.11.2011, 18:43 Uhr, schrieb Steve Teale
> <steve.teale at britseyeview.com>:
> 
>> On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 13:22:49 -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>
>>> On Thursday, November 03, 2011 09:22 Steve Teale wrote:
>>>> I see that Walter just fixed a typedef bug in 2.056, even though I
>>>> was just ticked of for even thinking of using one ;=)
>>>
>>> He probably fixed it because it hasn't actually been given the axe
>>> yet, but it's definitely going to get the axe - and probably soon,
>>> since there was some discussion of wanting to remove (or at least
>>> deprecate) features that are definitely going to be removed before gdc
>>> actually makes it into gcc so that the changes are less disruptive
>>> when they happen.
>>>
>> Jonathan,
>>
>> I thank you for your reply. I was just watching Sarkozy at the G20
>> talking about the potential Greek referendum. He took a similarly firm
> It caused some discussion. Someone didn't like the naked-function
> feature or other traits of D that (official) support has to be written
> for in the GCC backend first. But I don't see how D would become
> unbearable for the GCC people as long as the frontend is maintained.
> There have been other language frontends bitrotting before, so the
> 'Eurozone' is suspicious and looks closely on who is joining them. Since
> D in GCC is often requested I believe it will have a positive future
> there and give the language more momentum, since people don't have to
> leave their known and pre-installed tool chain.

I was thinking of us as Greece and them as Eurozone - what effects on DMD?