Thanks!

"antiAlias" <fu@bar.com> wrote in message news:cgnvea$1u5g$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote
> > Message numbers of the specific ones would also be most helpful.
>
> No problem ... here's a few:
>
> news:c74fis$gfi$1@digitaldaemon.com news:c9h3us$2qjl$1@digitaldaemon.com news:c9igfc$1r64$1@digitaldaemon.com news:c9j0lk$2i1a$1@digitaldaemon.com news:c9lc9k$2vc0$1@digitaldaemon.com news:cbla1e$1llq$1@digitaldaemon.com news:ccc8kc$306m$1@digitaldaemon.com news:cctgns$sst$1@digitaldaemon.com news:c4f7rj$2qgi$1@digitaldaemon.com news:c5phf1$1idh$1@digitaldaemon.com news:cgaqe6$11je$1@digitaldaemon.com
>
> The "Satisfying Interface Contracts via Inheritance" issue is not written
up
> as a bug, because it's a (crucial, IMO)missing feature. I sent email to
you
> about this one on April 8th, 12:08pm PST, and it's been noted a few times since then.
>
>
>
> > "antiAlias" <fu@bar.com> wrote in message news:cgesu7$k2r$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > Appreciated. Please let me know if you need further input.
> > >
> > > "Walter"  wrote
> > > > Ok, I'll check them out.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > "antiAlias" <fu@bar.com> wrote in message news:cg5gte$k4c$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > > > "Walter" wrote...
> > > > > > What exactly is mango waiting on?
> > > > >
> > > > > - The ongoing Interface issues (now described as Interface MI
> issues)
> > > > > originally noted in April, then again in June. Release notes for
> v0.99
> > > say
> > > > > this is resolved, though I haven't tried it yet. Certain areas of
> > Mango
> > > > have
> > > > > been terribly fragile for months due to this, and non-extensible.
> For
> > > > > example, whenever a gpf would occur in relation to Interface
usage,
> > I'd
> > > go
> > > > > in and switch the order in which Interfaces were declared in class declarations (lunacy!). It would eliminate the gpf for one area
but
> > move
> > > > it
> > > > > to another. Adding additional Interfaces to class declarations
> simply
> > > > > aggravated the problem, so Mango development vis-a-vis Interfaces
> just
> > > > > stopped.
> > > > >
> > > > > - The version() operational discrepancy between Windows and linux
> was
> > > > still
> > > > > causing grief recently.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Static constructors not invoked for inner/nested classes.
> > > > >
> > > > > - The static-constructor ordering noted in May, June, and July.
I've
> > > held
> > > > > off on a few things until that is resolved.
> > > > >
> > > > > - The inability of a class to satisfy an Interface contract via
its
> > > > > inheritance tree (noted in April). This is a design issue rather
> than
> > a
> > > > bug,
> > > > > but it places a burden on Mango clients that is totally
unnecessary
> > and,
> > > > > frankly, untenable. You don't really run into this until you start
> > using
> > > > > Interfaces a lot. Mango is an Interface-based design so,
naturally,
> > > > > comes-a-cropper over this all the time. You note there's a
potential
> > > > > type-hole involved (though the hole is of a questionable nature,
> IMO),
> > > yet
> > > > > there are likely several ways to avoid said hole completely while
> > still
> > > > > providing the required functionality.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Corrupt stack when assigning 'out' arguments within a
nested/inner
> > > > > function.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Each of these has stalled, delayed, or halted Mango development in
> one
> > > way
> > > > > or another. Sure, one just finds something else to work on; but
it's
> > > hard
> > > > to
> > > > > maintain focus when ongoing issues are not resolved for months on
> end.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>