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: -------
