Lutger wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
We faced a bug that module static constructors don't work with cyclic
imports. Currently it's fixed with a dirty hack which is not really
acceptable. Is there any chance for this to be fixed?
IMO it is the cyclic import that is the bug ;)
Maybe all cyclic dependency bugs are on purpose, to teach people not to
use this evil D feature? Yeah, that must it be. I can't explain why else
these bugs/issues aren't fixed, and why people only reply with
incredibly useful statements like "but you shouldn't use this feature
anyway!".
Broken features should be either fixed or removed. This half-assedness
about it isn't really going to help D.
Well it's about cyclic dependency of initialization via module constructors
only right? Cyclic imports in general aren't (supposed to be) broken, nor
are module constructors.
Additionally, the compiler has sufficient information to complain about
the problem at compile time, but it doesn't. That is a bug.
