On Apr 10, 2012 7:08 PM, "H. S. Teoh" <hst...@quickfur.ath.cx> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:10:19AM +0200, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote: > > I'm planning to go over druntime and add nothrow/pure everywhere I > > can, but I don't want to disturb anyone else who's currently working > > on patches that this could disrupt. > [...] > > Please do. The current lack of proper function qualifiers has been > bugging me to no end, every time I try to do the same in my own code. I > inevitably have to remove some qualifiers that should be there, just > because of a single druntime construct that wasn't properly qualified. > > And while you're at it, you might want to consider const too. Last I > looked, a whole bunch of stuff that should be const, isn't. > > And best of luck to you... the last time I tried to do the same thing I > ended up changing almost the entire druntime, and still couldn't get the > result to compile. > > > T > > -- > "I speak better English than this villain Bush" -- Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, Iraqi Minister of Information
I was wondering why they could not be implied from the code itself.