On Monday, November 15, 2010 13:59:10 Don wrote: > Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > On Monday 15 November 2010 12:49:05 Don wrote: > >> d-bugm...@puremagic.com wrote: > >>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5093 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> --- Comment #3 from simon <s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com> 2010-11-15 > >>> 11:03:49 PST --- Created an attachment (id=812) > >>> PATCH against rev 755: implement a module import backtrace for static > >>> assert > >>> > >>> Implements a module import back-trace for static asserts. > >>> > >>> This ought to be implemented for non-static asserts as well, > >>> but that probably involves mucking about in the back end > >>> and I can't be bothered diving into that at the mo. > >> > >> Cool! In cases where it's imported from inside a static if, this is > >> fantastic. > >> Ideally, it would only do the module trace starting from the last > >> instantiated template. (Which would mean that in many cases, it wouldn't > >> appear at all). I think this should be applied to all template > >> instantiation back traces. > > > > I expect that you meant to post a comment to the bug rather than post on > > the bug list... > > > > - Jonathan M Davis > > You expect wrong.
Okay. Sorry. It's just that normally no one posts directly to the list and any comments posted directly to the list probably won't get seen in the long run, since people will generally look at the bug reports directly. - Jonathan M Davis
