On 12/19/10 9:19 PM, Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
On 12/19/2010 01:44 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I don't think it's worth investigating this, but at any rate my
thinking has been that finalizing TDPL would finalize the
specification of D2. Of course, ideally the compiler would follow
the specification as closely as possible, but with the number of
extant issues it has always been pretty clear that conformance will
be trailing.
Always? It became clear at some point, but did you really not expect all
the features to be fully implemented when you started the book?
How about this statement from you:
May 15, 2009: Re: Please Vote: Exercises in TDPL?
"One nice thing is I've written (in D!) a little script that extracts
the code from all of my examples, compiles it, and runs it comparing the
output with the expected output. The book will definitely have a number
of faults, but code that doesn't work will not be one of them. [..]
There's still stuff that doesn't compile (Walter is working on that)"
Yes, how about it? Is this a murder investigation? I have a hard time
figuring out what is the ultimate purpose of spelunking my past
statements to look for inconsistencies.
Andrei
