digitalmars.D.bugs - broken: #line integer ["filespec"]
- Thomas Kuehne (8/9) Oct 13 2004 The documentation only states that the line number is an integer, but th...
- Burton Radons (10/18) Oct 13 2004 It's defined as taking Integer, which is defined earlier in the lexical
- Thomas Kuehne (8/10) Oct 14 2004 I think the signed issue was simply ommited from the documentation. If i...
- Stewart Gordon (4/11) Oct 14 2004 compile-time constant != literal
special token "line":#line integer ["filespec"]\nThe documentation only states that the line number is an integer, but the implementation rejects negative integers. test case: svn://svn.kuehne.cn/dstress/run/line_token_01.d The filespec "" is accepted by both the documentation and the implementation but is treated as if no filespec was given. test case: svn://svn.kuehne.cn/dstress/run/line_token_03.d Even non-empty filespecs are ignored and instead the original filespec is used. test case: svn://svn.kuehne.cn/dstress/run/line_token_04.d Thomas
Oct 13 2004
Thomas Kuehne wrote:special token "line":It's defined as taking Integer, which is defined earlier in the lexical page. Integer literals are not signed. For CPP compatibility, it should take decimal digits only; for example, 019 to indicate 19: http://www.kuzbass.ru:8086/docs/isocpp/cpp.html#cpp.line (definition of digit-sequence): http://www.kuzbass.ru:8086/docs/isocpp/lex.html#lex.fcon In addition, string escapes are allowed in CPP: http://www.kuzbass.ru:8086/docs/isocpp/lex.html#lex.string#line integer ["filespec"]\nThe documentation only states that the line number is an integer, but the implementation rejects negative integers. test case: svn://svn.kuehne.cn/dstress/run/line_token_01.d
Oct 13 2004
Burton Radons schrieb:It's defined as taking Integer, which is defined earlier in the lexical page. Integer literals are not signed.I think the signed issue was simply ommited from the documentation. If integer literals are un-signed then I don't know why the code below is accepted by the compiler. code: Thomas
Oct 14 2004
Thomas Kuehne wrote: <snip>I think the signed issue was simply ommited from the documentation. If integer literals are un-signed then I don't know why the code below is accepted by the compiler. code:compile-time constant != literal Stewart.
Oct 14 2004