• Peter Alexander (7/7) Sep 25 2011 See: http://d-programming-language.org/lex.html
• Peter Alexander (8/15) Sep 25 2011 btw...
• Timon Gehr (2/9) Sep 25 2011 @ is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.
• Bernard Helyer (2/3) Sep 25 2011 Yep, so Peter's stumbled on a bug. Bugzilla that shit, Peter! :D
• Peter Alexander (6/9) Sep 26 2011 Well, if outdated documentation is a bug, then I suppose so.
• Jonathan M Davis (4/18) Sep 26 2011 There is specifically a category in bugzilla for issues with the website...
• Peter Alexander (10/28) Sep 27 2011 I selected that category.
• Jonathan M Davis (7/42) Sep 27 2011 That _is_ the right category. You seemed to be in doubt about whether
• Peter Alexander (3/45) Sep 27 2011 Ah ok, my bad. I though that you were implying that I had put it in the

Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:

See: http://d-programming-language.org/lex.html

It says:

q{   } // error,   is not a valid D token

but...

http://d-programming-language.org/lex.html#Token

This clearly shows that   is a token.

So, which is it?

Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:

On 25/09/11 4:49 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
 See: http://d-programming-language.org/lex.html

 It says:

 q{   } // error,   is not a valid D token

 but...

 http://d-programming-language.org/lex.html#Token

 This clearly shows that   is a token.

 So, which is it?

btw...

import std.stdio;

void main()
{
   writeln( q{   } );
}

This compiles and does what you'd expect in DMD 2.055.

Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:

On 09/25/2011 05:49 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
 See: http://d-programming-language.org/lex.html

 It says:

 q{   } // error,   is not a valid D token

 but...

 http://d-programming-language.org/lex.html#Token

 This clearly shows that   is a token.

 So, which is it?

  is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.

Bernard Helyer <b.helyer gmail.com> writes:

On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:10:53 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
   is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.

Yep, so Peter's stumbled on a bug. Bugzilla that shit, Peter! :D

Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:

On 26/09/11 2:47 AM, Bernard Helyer wrote:
 On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:10:53 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
   is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.

 Yep, so Peter's stumbled on a bug. Bugzilla that shit, Peter! :D

Well, if outdated documentation is a bug, then I suppose so.

Done
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6734

And done!
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pull/27

"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:

On Monday, September 26, 2011 12:09 Peter Alexander wrote:
 On 26/09/11 2:47 AM, Bernard Helyer wrote:
 On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:10:53 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
   is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.

 
 Yep, so Peter's stumbled on a bug. Bugzilla that shit, Peter! :D

 
 Well, if outdated documentation is a bug, then I suppose so.
 
 Done
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6734
 
 And done!
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pull/2
 7

There is specifically a category in bugzilla for issues with the website, and 
the online documentation is included in that.

- Jonathan M Davis

Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:

On 26/09/11 8:30 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Monday, September 26, 2011 12:09 Peter Alexander wrote:
 On 26/09/11 2:47 AM, Bernard Helyer wrote:
 On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:10:53 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
   is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.

 Yep, so Peter's stumbled on a bug. Bugzilla that shit, Peter! :D

 Well, if outdated documentation is a bug, then I suppose so.

 Done
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6734

 And done!
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pull/2
 7

 There is specifically a category in bugzilla for issues with the website, and
 the online documentation is included in that.

 - Jonathan M Davis

I selected that category.

"Component: websites"

When you select that component it gives you a description:

"Component Description
Problems with the contents of www.digitalmars.com and 
www.d-programming-language.org, including the language specification"

If that wasn't the right place for the bug then perhaps it shouldn't say 
that it is! Also, where is the other category that you speak of? I can't 
see it anywhere.

"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:

On Tuesday, September 27, 2011 11:05 Peter Alexander wrote:
 On 26/09/11 8:30 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Monday, September 26, 2011 12:09 Peter Alexander wrote:
 On 26/09/11 2:47 AM, Bernard Helyer wrote:
 On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:10:53 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
   is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.

 
 Yep, so Peter's stumbled on a bug. Bugzilla that shit, Peter! :D

 
 Well, if outdated documentation is a bug, then I suppose so.
 
 Done
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6734
 
 And done!
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pul
 l/2 7

 
 There is specifically a category in bugzilla for issues with the website,
 and the online documentation is included in that.
 
 - Jonathan M Davis

 
 I selected that category.
 
 "Component: websites"
 
 When you select that component it gives you a description:
 
 "Component Description
 Problems with the contents of www.digitalmars.com and
 www.d-programming-language.org, including the language specification"
 
 If that wasn't the right place for the bug then perhaps it shouldn't say
 that it is! Also, where is the other category that you speak of? I can't
 see it anywhere.

That _is_ the right category. You seemed to be in doubt about whether 
documentation bugs went in Bugzilla, so I pointed out that they do. If they're 
spec bugs (as opposed to bugs in druntime's or Phobos' documentation, which
go under druntime and Phobos respectively), they go  under the websites
component. What you did was correct.

- Jonathan M Davis

Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:

On 27/09/11 9:02 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Tuesday, September 27, 2011 11:05 Peter Alexander wrote:
 On 26/09/11 8:30 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Monday, September 26, 2011 12:09 Peter Alexander wrote:
 On 26/09/11 2:47 AM, Bernard Helyer wrote:
 On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:10:53 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
   is a token. The documentation was probably written when it was not.

 Yep, so Peter's stumbled on a bug. Bugzilla that shit, Peter! :D

 Well, if outdated documentation is a bug, then I suppose so.

 Done
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6734

 And done!
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pul
 l/2 7

 There is specifically a category in bugzilla for issues with the website,
 and the online documentation is included in that.

 - Jonathan M Davis

 I selected that category.

 "Component: websites"

 When you select that component it gives you a description:

 "Component Description
 Problems with the contents of www.digitalmars.com and
 www.d-programming-language.org, including the language specification"

 If that wasn't the right place for the bug then perhaps it shouldn't say
 that it is! Also, where is the other category that you speak of? I can't
 see it anywhere.

 That _is_ the right category. You seemed to be in doubt about whether
 documentation bugs went in Bugzilla, so I pointed out that they do. If they're
 spec bugs (as opposed to bugs in druntime's or Phobos' documentation, which
 go under druntime and Phobos respectively), they go  under the websites
 component. What you did was correct.

 - Jonathan M Davis

Ah ok, my bad. I though that you were implying that I had put it in the 
wrong place!