https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16491
--- Comment #8 from Steven Schveighoffer ---
(In reply to uplink.coder from comment #6)
> In this case the cycle is non-harmful.
> Since no run-time initialized data is used.
Yes, that is what issue 16673 is about -- using statically available data
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16491
--- Comment #7 from anonymous4 ---
If it didn't use runtime data, it could be computed at compile time.
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16491
uplink.co...@googlemail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uplink.co...@googlemail.com
---
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16491
Steven Schveighoffer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schvei...@yahoo.com
See Als
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16491
--- Comment #4 from Ethan Watson ---
Of course it can be solved by assigning this specific string at compile time.
Because you remove the shared static constructor.
Replace the contents of the constructor with a writeln and delete the gshared
storag
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16491
Jacob Carlborg changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d...@me.com
--- Comment #3 from Jacob Carlb
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16491
--- Comment #2 from Ethan Watson ---
It is purely for illustrative/example purposes. The data I'm using cannot be
immutable.
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16491
--- Comment #1 from Sobirari Muhomori ---
Can't the name be immutable?
immutable string someOtherClassName = SomeOtherClass.stringof;
--
