digitalmars.D - Is Bug 5710 likely to get fixed?
- Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d (11/11) Jun 05 2014 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5710
- Steven Schveighoffer (6/9) Jun 05 2014 If Kenji cannot fix it, it doesn't look good for getting fixed...
- Timon Gehr (6/17) Jun 05 2014 There is _absolutely no reason whatsoever_ to think about creation of a
- Steven Schveighoffer (5/23) Jun 05 2014 You should speak up on the bug report, at the very least to share your
- Kagamin (2/2) Jun 10 2014 Hmm, the multicontext array looks complicated, see a simpler
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5710 Is this likely to get fixed or is it more likely to drift along as an unfixed issue? I am not discommoded by this, it is a matter of codebase style. Thanks. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Jun 05 2014
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:16:06 -0400, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5710 Is this likely to get fixed or is it more likely to drift along as an unfixed issue?If Kenji cannot fix it, it doesn't look good for getting fixed... It would be nice, but I agree with the statement that it shouldn't force the creation of a new delegate type. -Steve
Jun 05 2014
On 06/05/2014 08:42 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:16:06 -0400, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:Why?https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5710 Is this likely to get fixed or is it more likely to drift along as an unfixed issue?If Kenji cannot fix it, it doesn't look good for getting fixed... ...It would be nice, but I agree with the statement that it shouldn't force the creation of a new delegate type. -SteveThere is _absolutely no reason whatsoever_ to think about creation of a new delegate type. The entire argument around performance implications for existing code and creation of new delegate types is completely nonsensical and both David and Martin have already pointed this out.
Jun 05 2014
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 16:37:14 -0400, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> wrote:On 06/05/2014 08:42 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:Because he's a D superstar?On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:16:06 -0400, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:Why?https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5710 Is this likely to get fixed or is it more likely to drift along as an unfixed issue?If Kenji cannot fix it, it doesn't look good for getting fixed... ...You should speak up on the bug report, at the very least to share your opinion, which many people value. -SteveIt would be nice, but I agree with the statement that it shouldn't force the creation of a new delegate type.There is _absolutely no reason whatsoever_ to think about creation of a new delegate type. The entire argument around performance implications for existing code and creation of new delegate types is completely nonsensical and both David and Martin have already pointed this out.
Jun 05 2014
Hmm, the multicontext array looks complicated, see a simpler solution.
Jun 10 2014