http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10581
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |jmdavisp...@gmx.com Resolution| |INVALID --- Comment #1 from Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> 2013-07-09 10:10:22 PDT --- Sorry, but that's not a bug. It's one of the major reasons that the newer lambda syntax was introduced. The string lambda syntax only works with stuff that's imported by std.functional, and there's no reason for std.functional to import std.uni other than making string lambdas work with std.uni, and we obviously can't make that work with everything, because we can't have std.functional importing everything. Also, while I don't particularly like it (as string lambdas are really nice for short stuff), Andrei and Walter seem to be in favor of phasing out string lambdas anyway. But you're really not saving much by using a string lambda here anyway, so in this particular case, I don't think that that's much of a loss. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------