Bugs fixed.

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

Walter wrote:
> Bugs fixed.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

"Fixed D.bugs/4249"

In what respect was this a bug?

Stewart.

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.

In article <d8u3rb$t88$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Stewart Gordon says...
>
>Walter wrote:
>> Bugs fixed.
>> 
>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>
>"Fixed D.bugs/4249"
>
>In what respect was this a bug?

Perhaps recursive inheritance should not be allowed?  I'm kind of confused by this one too.


Sean

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d8u3rb$t88$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Walter wrote:
> > Bugs fixed.
> >
> > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>
> "Fixed D.bugs/4249"
>
> In what respect was this a bug?

I didn't think it was right or intuitive that A, A.A, A.A.A, A.A.A.A, etc., were all the same thing.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Walter schrieb am Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:42:22 -0700:
>
> "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d8u3rb$t88$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> Walter wrote:
>> > Bugs fixed.
>> >
>> > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>>
>> "Fixed D.bugs/4249"
>>
>> In what respect was this a bug?
>
> I didn't think it was right or intuitive that A, A.A, A.A.A, A.A.A.A, etc., were all the same thing.

Is this documented?

Thomas


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFCs8fa3w+/yD4P9tIRAnO+AJ92C15FNeQSk3fER9HGqt3rOkgZcACdF+Bq
HuxgC3fsGDBB3eAymIs7R/g=
=QBOr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Thomas Kuehne" <thomas-dloop@kuehne.this-is-spam.cn> wrote in message news:qntco2-4k4.ln1@lnews.kuehne.cn...
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Walter schrieb am Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:42:22 -0700:
> >
> > "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d8u3rb$t88$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >> Walter wrote:
> >> > Bugs fixed.
> >> >
> >> > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
> >>
> >> "Fixed D.bugs/4249"
> >>
> >> In what respect was this a bug?
> >
> > I didn't think it was right or intuitive that A, A.A, A.A.A, A.A.A.A,
etc.,
> > were all the same thing.
>
> Is this documented?

Not sure, but I think it's implicit that A is not a part of A, and furthermore, it servers no purpose to support A.A, A.A.A, etc.

"Operator Overloading" documentation still has === referred to ;) (just past
opCmp stuff)

In article <d91k96$oh9$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
>
>
>"Thomas Kuehne" <thomas-dloop@kuehne.this-is-spam.cn> wrote in message news:qntco2-4k4.ln1@lnews.kuehne.cn...
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Walter schrieb am Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:42:22 -0700:
>> >
>> > "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d8u3rb$t88$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> >> Walter wrote:
>> >> > Bugs fixed.
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>> >>
>> >> "Fixed D.bugs/4249"
>> >>
>> >> In what respect was this a bug?
>> >
>> > I didn't think it was right or intuitive that A, A.A, A.A.A, A.A.A.A,
>etc.,
>> > were all the same thing.
>>
>> Is this documented?
>
>Not sure, but I think it's implicit that A is not a part of A, and furthermore, it servers no purpose to support A.A, A.A.A, etc.
>
>

Regards,
James Dunne