On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:46:11 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/27/2020 2:34 AM, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 09:09:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/26/2020 11:20 PM, Bruce Carneal wrote:
I'm not at all concerned with legacy non-compiling code of
this nature.
Apparently you agree it is not an actual problem.
Really? I don't know if you really missed the point being
made, or you're being provocative. Both seem unlikely to me.
His argument was:
"Currently a machine checked @safe function calling an
unannotated extern C routine will error out during compilation.
This is great as the C routine was not machine checked, and
generally can not be checked. Post 1028, IIUC, the compilation
will go through without complaint. This seems quite clear.
What am I missing?"
I replied that it was unlikely that such legacy code existed.
He replied that he was not concerned about it.
I.e. working legacy code is not going break.
You continue to miss the point.
Additionally, there never was any "working legacy code". As
established, the pre 1080 compiler would have rejected the code.
Does-not-compile != working-code.
