import std.stdio;
struct S
{
int bigUglyName;
void foo( S s )
{
alias bigUglyName local;
alias s.bigUglyName b;
writeln( "bigUglyName (AKA local)=", local, " b=", b );
}
}
void main()
{
S s1;
S s2;
s1.bigUglyName = 1;
s2.bigUglyName = 2;
code:
class A {
void test(int) {}
}
class B : A {
void test() {
super.test(1); // compiles
test(10); // error
}
}
Error: function B.test () is not callable using argument types
(int)
I don't see any reason why it should not compile.
import std.array;
import std.range;
import std.algorithm;
class Foo {
}
void main() {
auto result = iota(3).map!(i => new immutable Foo).array();
}
/usr/include/dmd/phobos/std/conv.d(4028): Error: cannot
implicitly convert expression (
On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 23:35:43 UTC, mimi wrote:
import std.stdio;
struct S
{
int bigUglyName;
void foo( S s )
{
alias bigUglyName local;
alias s.bigUglyName b;
writeln( "bigUglyName (AKA local)=", local, " b=", b );
}
}
void main()
{
S s1;
S
Well, how you can reduce the long ugly name in this case? In the
real function I mentioned it so many times.
void foo( S s )
{
auto local = this.bigUglyName;
auto b = s.bigUglyName;
writeln( "bigUglyName (AKA local)=", local, " b=", b );
}
:P
On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 10:17:01 UTC, Namespace wrote:
void foo( S s )
{
auto local = this.bigUglyName;
auto b = s.bigUglyName;
writeln( "bigUglyName (AKA local)=", local, " b=", b );
}
:P
By the way, yes. Thanks for that, I'm stupid today.
On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 10:07:49 UTC, mimi wrote:
Well, how you can reduce the long ugly name in this case? In
the real function I mentioned it so many times.
By not making the name ugly big.
On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 11:32:46 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 10:07:49 UTC, mimi wrote:
Well, how you can reduce the long ugly name in this case? In
the real function I mentioned it so many times.
By not making the name ugly big.
Other people do.
In addition, sometime
On 05/10/2015 10:18 AM, Jack Applegame wrote:
code:
class A {
void test(int) {}
}
class B : A {
void test() {
super.test(1); // compiles
test(10); // error
}
}
Error: function B.test () is not callable using argument types (int)
It is a concept called "name
Jack Applegame wrote:
>> test(10); // error
One can "import" the declaration by using an alias:
class A {
void test(int) {}
}
class B : A {
alias test= super.test;
void test() {
super.test(1); // compiles
test(10); // compiles
}
}
-manfred
On Sunday, May 10, 2015 10:48:33 Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On 05/10/2015 10:18 AM, Jack Applegame wrote:
> > code:
> >
> >> class A {
> >> void test(int) {}
> >> }
> >>
> >> class B : A {
> >> void test() {
> >> super.test(1); // compiles
> >> test(10);
Ok, it's a feature. Thanks.
I'd say bug, I think the array function is trying an optimization
it shouldn't be trying for immutable classes.
On Sunday, June 28, 2015 11:37:59 Jack Applegame via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> I don't see any reason why it should not compile.
>
> import std.array;
> import std.range;
> import std.algorithm;
>
> class Foo {
> }
>
> void main() {
> auto result = iota(3).map!(i => new immutable Foo).array();
On Monday, 29 June 2015 at 12:04:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
You haven't declared an immutable constructor, so you can't
construct an immutable Foo.
That's not what's happening. Constructing an immutable Foo works
just fine.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 05:04:36 -0700
Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Sunday, June 28, 2015 11:37:59 Jack Applegame via
> Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> > I don't see any reason why it should not compile.
> >
> > import std.array;
> > import std.range;
> > import std.algorithm;
>
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14751
On Monday, 29 June 2015 at 14:28:06 UTC, anonymous wrote:
On Monday, 29 June 2015 at 12:04:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
You haven't declared an immutable constructor, so you can't
construct an immutable Foo.
That's not what's happening. Constructing an immutable Foo
works just fine.
Then
fix - https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3524
This code:
import std.stdio;
import std.datetime;
void main()
{
SysTime t = SysTime.init;
writeln(t);
}
results in segfault with dmd-2.068.2
Is it ok?
Backtrace:
#0 0x004733f3 in std.datetime.SysTime.adjTime() const ()
#1 0x004730b9 in std.datetime.SysTime.toSimpleS
On Monday, October 05, 2015 18:12:06 tchaloupka via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> This code:
>
> import std.stdio;
> import std.datetime;
>
> void main()
> {
> SysTime t = SysTime.init;
> writeln(t);
> }
>
> results in segfault with dmd-2.068.2
>
> Is it ok?
It is by design, albeit undesi
On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 05:54:44 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
It is by design, albeit undesirable. When SysTime was
originally written, it was impossible to have a default value
for a class reference other than null. So, unless SysTime was
going to take the performance hit of constantly c
std.c.stdlib.exit() seems to break RAII. The code below tests this
both using a struct destructor and an explicit scope(exit) {}. Is
this an intentional feature or a bug?
import std.stdio;
import std.c.stdlib;
void main()
{
struct SafeExit {
~this() {
writeln("Safely exit
void main()
{
auto x = 9223372036854775808; // long.max + 1
}
onlineapp.d(3): Error: signed integer overflow
According to spec x should be of type ulong and this should
compile? It indeed compiles if I add the uL postfix.
Is this a bug or indented behaviour?
On 2011-12-29 18:22, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On Thursday, 29 December 2011 at 16:27:33 UTC, Ashish Myles wrote:
std.c.stdlib.exit() seems to break RAII. The code below tests this
both using a struct destructor and an explicit scope(exit) {}. Is
this an intentional feature or a bug?
import std.stdio;
Probably the easiest thing to do is to throw a custom exception and
catch it somewhere in main() to return your status code. Unlike
exit(), throwing will take care of RAII stuff.
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> On Thursday, 29 December 2011 at 16:27:33 UTC, Ashish Myles wrote:
>>
>> std.c.stdlib.exit() seems to break RAII. The code below tests this
>> both using a struct destructor and an explicit scope(exit) {}. Is
>> this an intentional feature or
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
> Probably the easiest thing to do is to throw a custom exception and
> catch it somewhere in main() to return your status code. Unlike
> exit(), throwing will take care of RAII stuff.
Thanks, Andrej. That option had occurred to me, but I fi
On Thursday, 29 December 2011 at 16:27:33 UTC, Ashish Myles wrote:
std.c.stdlib.exit() seems to break RAII. The code below tests
this
both using a struct destructor and an explicit scope(exit) {}.
Is
this an intentional feature or a bug?
import std.stdio;
import std.c.stdlib;
void main()
{
On Thursday, 29 December 2011 at 17:22:33 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
Calling 'exit' doesn't properly shut down the D runtime either,
it's not just constructors.
I mean destructors*.
On 12/29/2011 12:43 PM, Ashish Myles wrote:
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
Probably the easiest thing to do is to throw a custom exception and
catch it somewhere in main() to return your status code. Unlike
exit(), throwing will take care of RAII stuff.
Thanks, Andre
On Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:43:36 Ashish Myles wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Andrej Mitrovic
>
> wrote:
> > Probably the easiest thing to do is to throw a custom exception and
> > catch it somewhere in main() to return your status code. Unlike
> > exit(), throwing will take care
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>
> A D exit function would have to do essentially the same thing as throw an
> exception and catch it in main anyway. The only way that the stack is going to
> be unwound properly is if you actually unwind it. The only way in the language
>
On Thursday, December 29, 2011 23:03:23 Ashish Myles wrote:
> Since D
> could conceivably implement a very safe exit() without an explicit use
> of Exceptions to get around the "catch Exception() {}" problem you
> mentioned above, does it make sense to request a safer exit() feature
> for D?
And h
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 5:43 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Thursday, December 29, 2011 23:03:23 Ashish Myles wrote:
>> Since D
>> could conceivably implement a very safe exit() without an explicit use
>> of Exceptions to get around the "catch Exception() {}" problem you
>> mentioned above, does
On Friday, December 30, 2011 10:45:43 Ashish Myles wrote:
> Ok, now there are two issues here:
> IMPLEMENTATION: Implementation of a safe_exit() without an explicit
> Exception seems to be easy to do at the language level for a
> single-threaded program -- you simply have a hidden/system class like
Thanks, Jonathan, for your detailed answer.
Ashish
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Friday, December 30, 2011 10:45:43 Ashish Myles wrote:
>> Ok, now there are two issues here:
>> IMPLEMENTATION: Implementation of a safe_exit() without an explicit
>> Exception seems
On 29/12/2011 19:09, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Could druntime hook up on the atexit function to run destructors and similar
when the
program exits?
I'm not sure. Maybe it could be called upon to run static destructors and destruct
heap-allocated objects. But in order to call scope guards and R
Just implement your own exception type, e.g. ExitException, and then use:
void main() { try { realMain(); } catch (ExitException e) { return 0; }
void exit() { throw ExitException(); }
where realMain is the actual main function. Then just call exit()
whenever you want to.
That should have been int main.
On 06/01/2012 14:44, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Just implement your own exception type, e.g. ExitException, and then use:
That's more or less what people have already said. What's more, Ashish has already
suggested a further improvement whereby the custom exception carries an exit code.
void m
It is impossible to pack a structure with shared object into
tuple.
```
import std.concurrency;
import std.typecons;
class Foo {}
struct A {
shared Foo foo;
}
void main() {
auto a = tuple(new shared Foo); // ОК
auto b = tuple(A());// Error: static assert "unable
On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 07:09:30 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
void main()
{
auto x = 9223372036854775808; // long.max + 1
}
You need to tell, that this is an unsigned long literal, else the
compiler treats it as an int:
void main()
{
auto x = 9223372036854775808UL; // long.ma
On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 07:44:37 UTC, berni44 wrote:
On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 07:09:30 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
void main()
{
auto x = 9223372036854775808; // long.max + 1
}
You need to tell, that this is an unsigned long literal, else
the compiler treats it as an int:
On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 09:33:13 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
See: https://dlang.org/spec/lex.html#integerliteral
What I am aiming at: Is the spec wrong or am I misunderstanding
it and did this change recently?
You are right. The implementation does not do what the specs tell
here.
I
On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 10:32:10 UTC, berni44 wrote:
On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 09:33:13 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
See: https://dlang.org/spec/lex.html#integerliteral
What I am aiming at: Is the spec wrong or am I
misunderstanding it and did this change recently?
You are rig
On 8/27/13, Jack Applegame wrote:
> It is impossible to pack a structure with shared object into
> tuple.
Bug. Please file it to bugzilla:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/enter_bug.cgi?product=D
Thanks!
On Monday, 26 August 2013 at 23:04:24 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Bug. Please file it to bugzilla:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/enter_bug.cgi?product=D
Thanks!
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10907
Hi all!
The following code compiles and works, but the static methods do
not
have a return type. It also compiles and works if the appropiate
(or auto)
return type is added to them.
-8><
import std.stdio;
class B {
int foo () { return 1; }
This is simple code to create all genetic combinations from two
organisms.
string[] mixGenes(string a, string b) {
string[] result;
foreach(i;0..2)
foreach(j;0..2)
foreach(k;2..4)
foreach(m;2..4)
This is simple code to create all genetic combinations from two
organisms.
string[] mixGenes(string a, string b) {
string[] result;
foreach(i;0..2)
foreach(j;0..2)
foreach(k;2..4)
foreach(m;2..4)
On Tuesday, 8 March 2016 at 13:40:06 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
Is it a feature or a bug?
It is allowed because the "auto" keyword doesn't actually
required for auto functions (or variables), what you need is any
one of the storage classes.
Those include static, auto, const, immutable, even
On Tuesday, 8 March 2016 at 14:13:17 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 March 2016 at 13:40:06 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
Is it a feature or a bug?
It is allowed because the "auto" keyword doesn't actually
required for auto functions (or variables), what you need is
any one of the storag
On Tuesday, March 08, 2016 14:56:06 Antonio Corbi via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 March 2016 at 14:13:17 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 8 March 2016 at 13:40:06 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
> >> Is it a feature or a bug?
> >
> > It is allowed because the "auto" keyword doesn
On 12/05/2012 09:30 AM, ixid wrote:
This is simple code to create all genetic combinations from two organisms.
string[] mixGenes(string a, string b) {
string[] result;
foreach(i;0..2)
foreach(j;0..2)
foreach(k;2..4)
foreach(m;2..4)
result ~= [a[i]] ~ [b[j]] ~ [a[k]] ~ [b[m]];
return result;
}
I don't know where that cast occurs but I wanted to state the
obvious: Operator ~ is defined only for arrays.
Would having it also work for individual units to make an array
be a plausible enhancement request? It would seem like a natural
use of the operator.
```d
import std;
auto abc(T)(auto ref T a, auto ref T b){
return a+b;
}
auto def(T)(auto ref T a, auto ref T b){
return a*b;
}
alias macro_1 = abc;
void main()
{
writeln(macro_1(15, 20));
alias macro_1 = def;// is this NOT considered variable
shadowing?
writeln(macro_1(
I just attempted to add one ubyte to another and store the result
in a ubyte but apparently ubytes get converted to ints when being
added... and converting what becomes an int becomes impossible to
store in a ubyte without an explicit cast...
ubyte a, b;
ubyte c = a + b; // Error: cannot impli
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 at 23:36:14 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 at 22:12:06 UTC, Soviet Friend
wrote:
I don't care if my computer needs to do math on a 4 byte
basis, I'm not writing assembly.
x86 actually doesn't need to do math that way, if you were
writing asse
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 18:36:35 UTC, Jonathan wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 at 23:36:14 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 at 22:12:06 UTC, Soviet Friend
wrote:
I don't care if my computer needs to do math on a 4 byte
basis, I'm not writing assembly.
x86 actuall
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 18:56:55 UTC, Dominikus Dittes
Scherkl wrote:
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 18:36:35 UTC, Jonathan wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 at 23:36:14 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 at 22:12:06 UTC, Soviet Friend
wrote:
I don't care if my computer
On 03/17/2018 11:36 AM, Jonathan wrote:
`(a+b)&0xff` What is this syntax?! Could you give a link to this in the
D documentation?
Here is my description of bitwise AND:
http://ddili.org/ders/d.en/bit_operations.html#ix_bit_operations.&,%20bitwise%20and
The section titled "Masking" on the sa
On Saturday, 14 August 2021 at 03:47:05 UTC, Tejas wrote:
```d
import std;
auto abc(T)(auto ref T a, auto ref T b){
return a+b;
}
auto def(T)(auto ref T a, auto ref T b){
return a*b;
}
alias macro_1 = abc;
void main()
{
writeln(macro_1(15, 20));
alias macro_1 = def;// is thi
On Saturday, 14 August 2021 at 04:01:31 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Saturday, 14 August 2021 at 03:47:05 UTC, Tejas wrote:
```d
import std;
auto abc(T)(auto ref T a, auto ref T b){
return a+b;
}
auto def(T)(auto ref T a, auto ref T b){
return a*b;
}
alias macro_1 = abc;
void main()
On Saturday, 14 August 2021 at 04:09:34 UTC, Tejas wrote:
[...]
Oh right, the ```.``` operator will reference variable in the
_module_ scope, not just the _immediate outer scope_,
you can use the module name to disambiguate as well. To extend
Mike answer, the general rule is that if you can d
On Saturday, 14 August 2021 at 08:23:20 UTC, user1234 wrote:
On Saturday, 14 August 2021 at 04:09:34 UTC, Tejas wrote:
[...]
Oh right, the ```.``` operator will reference variable in the
_module_ scope, not just the _immediate outer scope_,
you can use the module name to disambiguate as well.
struct Example
{
private void helper(int i, this X)() { }
void funcTempl(T, this X)(T value)
{
this.helper!0();
// ^ Why do I need this?
}
}
void main()
{
auto ex = Example();
ex.funcTempl(1);
}
The question is in the comment in the code. Is that intentio
Soviet Friend píše v Út 19. 01. 2016 v 22:12 +:
> I just attempted to add one ubyte to another and store the result
> in a ubyte but apparently ubytes get converted to ints when being
> added... and converting what becomes an int becomes impossible to
> store in a ubyte without an explicit c
On 01/19/2016 02:12 PM, Soviet Friend wrote:
> ubytes get converted to ints when being added...
It's a common feature involving all integral type in languages like C,
C++, and D:
https://dlang.org/spec/type.html#integer-promotions
> On the topic of complaining about casting... array length
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 at 22:12:06 UTC, Soviet Friend wrote:
I don't care if my computer needs to do math on a 4 byte basis,
I'm not writing assembly.
x86 actually doesn't need to do math that way, if you were
writing assembly, it would just work. This is just an annoying
rule brought ov
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:32:57 +0100, Daniel Kozak wrote:
> Soviet Friend píše v Út 19. 01. 2016 v 22:12 +:
>> I just attempted to add one ubyte to another and store the result in a
>> ubyte but apparently ubytes get converted to ints when being added...
>> and converting what becomes an int bec
Consider:
```
import std.range.iota;
auto r = iota(5, 0);
```
`r` is an empty range, as it should be. But if you call:
```
auto r = iota(5.0, 0);
```
then you get an exception (incorrect startup parameters).
This was unexpected, and a pain to debug. What is the rationale
behind iota having d
I am trying to build a struct with equality testing, using this code:
struct Foo
{
const bool opEquals(Foo f)
{
return true;
}
}
This gives me the error that the parameter should be of type "ref const Foo".
Fine.
struct Foo
{
const bool opEquals(ref const Foo f)
{
On Wednesday, 30 October 2019 at 20:22:25 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
struct Example
{
private void helper(int i, this X)() { }
void funcTempl(T, this X)(T value)
{
this.helper!0();
// ^ Why do I need this?
}
}
void main()
{
auto ex = Example();
ex.funcTempl(1
On 1/6/23 15:23, Arredondo wrote:
> then you get an exception (incorrect startup parameters).
Although that difference is a bug, iota does have a special floating
point implementation to prevent the accumulation of floating point
errors. I mention it as item 4 here:
https://www.youtube.com
On Saturday, 7 January 2023 at 00:52:20 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Although that difference is a bug, iota does have a special
floating point implementation to prevent the accumulation of
floating point errors.
Thank you for this clarification Ali. I appreciate the fact that
there is a specializ
On 1/6/23 17:50, Arredondo wrote:
> Would anyone volunteer to file a bug report?
Me! Me! :)
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23604
Ali
On Saturday, 7 January 2023 at 02:31:14 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 1/6/23 17:50, Arredondo wrote:
> Would anyone volunteer to file a bug report?
Me! Me! :)
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23604
Ali
Thanks a lot :D
Arredondo.
On Monday, August 29, 2011 22:41:26 Sean Eskapp wrote:
> I am trying to build a struct with equality testing, using this code:
>
> struct Foo
> {
> const bool opEquals(Foo f)
> {
> return true;
> }
> }
>
> This gives me the error that the parameter should be of type "ref const
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmx.com)'s article
> On Monday, August 29, 2011 22:41:26 Sean Eskapp wrote:
> > I am trying to build a struct with equality testing, using this code:
> >
> > struct Foo
> > {
> > const bool opEquals(Foo f)
> > {
> > return true;
> > }
Hi,
No wonder that it works, because it is the legacy C++ (and I like
that everything is different from zero is true):
if (5)
writeln("OK"); // prints OK
In the `static if` this condition also works perfectly:
static if (5)
writeln("OK"); // prints OK
Here idiomatic version check in
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 at 17:06:37 UTC, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
The problem is that the `static if` it does not work:
immutable hash = [1 : 3, 5 : 7];
static if (5 in hash)
writeln("OK");
// Error: expression &[1:3, 5:7][5]
// is not constant or does not evaluate to a bool
You have to writ
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 at 18:16:28 UTC, sigod wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 at 17:06:37 UTC, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
Pulls whether this issue? Or is it normal?
http://dlang.org/version.html#staticif:
StaticIfCondition:
static if ( AssignExpression )
AssignExpression is implicitly conve
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 at 17:06:37 UTC, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
[snip]
`static if(5 in hash) {}` will not work because (5 in hash)
returns a pointer to the value or null if the key oesn't exist.
bye,
lobo
On Sunday, 7 June 2015 at 03:01:15 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 at 17:06:37 UTC, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
[snip]
`static if(5 in hash) {}` will not work because (5 in hash)
returns a pointer to the value or null if the key oesn't exist.
bye,
lobo
just to be clear, you cannot hav
On Sunday, 7 June 2015 at 03:04:38 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Sunday, 7 June 2015 at 03:01:15 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 at 17:06:37 UTC, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
[snip]
`static if(5 in hash) {}` will not work because (5 in hash)
returns a pointer to the value or null if the key oesn't
On Sunday, 7 June 2015 at 03:04:38 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Sunday, 7 June 2015 at 03:01:15 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 at 17:06:37 UTC, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
[snip]
`static if(5 in hash) {}` will not work because (5 in hash)
returns a pointer to the value or null if the key oesn't
On Sunday, 7 June 2015 at 11:33:56 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
Not true:
immutable y = 1;
enum x = &y;
You can even do pointer arithmetics:
auto foo() {
auto x = [1,2,3,4];
auto y = &x[1];
return y[2];
}
pragma(msg, foo());
Then I do not see any proble
89 matches
Mail list logo
