On 15.09.2011 09:00, Don Clugston wrote:
On 15 September 2011 08:29, Rainer Schuetze<[email protected]> wrote:
What happens, if the evaluation of "static if" turns out to require symbols
from the same scope? (Something I did not mention above: unconditionally
existing or expanded members of a scope should be added to the symbol lookup
as soon as possible.) My current suggestion is: do not recurse into the
expansion of "complex" members, just use the currently available symbols.
What do you mean by "complex" members?
"complex" in the sense of my (no longer quoted) initial mail: the
members that have to be expanded before searching the scope is normally
possible, i.e. static-if and mixins. They need semantic analysis before
they might expand to new members that add more symbols to the scope.
_______________________________________________
dmd-internals mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
