Mostly bug fixes.

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

On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 02:03:08 -0400, Walter Bright <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> Mostly bug fixes.
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html


Wow, that new literal delegate syntax is crazy but I like it.

I suggest changing word lambda to literal on the changelog since lambda isn't mentioned in the spec and no need to make things more confusing.

- Chris

About this literal delegate syntax, there seems to be an ambiguity:
   void delegate() foo = { }; // Thinks it's a struct initializer.
   void delegate() foo = ( { } ); // Workaround.

Walter Bright schrieb:
> Mostly bug fixes.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

Thanks. Especially for 106.

Walter Bright wrote:
> Mostly bug fixes.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

Great update, lots of bugfixes, and the shorter delegate syntax looks awesome!

It says "Fixed Bugzilla 53 according to Bruno's analysis" but I don't know anything about bug 53. Did you meant Oskar, or perhaps bug 47?

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - CS/E student
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D

Walter Bright wrote:
> Mostly bug fixes.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

> Added opIn_r operator overload.

Excellent! I have just the use for that in this Python thing...

> New function template syntax.

So now that it's documented, it's here to stay and I can feel safe playing with it? Cool.

-Kirk McDonald

Walter Bright wrote:
> Mostly bug fixes.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

New delegate syntax looks great, can't wait to try it!

-DavidM

Walter Bright wrote:
> Mostly bug fixes.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

Thanks, Walter :) Nice list of bug fixes ! I also dig the new features :D


-- 
Tomasz Stachowiak  /+ a.k.a. h3r3tic +/

Walter Bright wrote:
> Mostly bug fixes.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

"Shadowing local variable declarations is now deprecated."

I thought it had always been illegal by the spec.


"Folded in D.bugs/7509"

You seem to have slipped up here:

"What's needed is an error handling philosophy and methodology such that:
[...]
    * 'Quick and dirty' utilities to be written that still correctly handle errors."

s/to/can


"Fixed Bugzilla 57  in 0.151"

Why is this in the changelog for 0.161?


"Fixed Bugzilla 36  (better error message)"
"Fixed Bugzilla 85  (now issues error message)"

And they're also marked as fixed in Bugzilla.  However, at the moment I can't seem to find the bit of the spec that indicates that either is illegal code.

Stewart.

Walter Bright wrote:
> Mostly bug fixes.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html

thanks!