• d-bugmail puremagic.com (14/14) Jun 25 2008 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2175
• d-bugmail puremagic.com (16/16) Sep 09 2008 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2175

d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2175

           Summary: wrong categorizing of dstress test case
           Product: D
           Version: 1.030
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: dstress
        AssignedTo: thomas-dloop kuehne.cn
        ReportedBy: davidl 126.com


trunk/run/c/case_01.d shouldn't be categorized as runnable any more


-- 

d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2175


kamm-removethis incasoftware.de changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED





-------
The comment in the file states:

// this clearly seems illegal but I can't find any rule combination disallowing
it

And indeed, the D spec seems not to forbid nested functions inside switch
blocks to contain a case statement; in fact, the spec is not very specific
about case statements in general (see the scope issues...).

However, in this case it seems clear enough that it should be illegal. I've
moved it to nocompile in dsource-dstress 1599.


--