It's probably well known issue:

$ cat test.d
import test2;

class X {
        Y.NY t;
        static class NX {
        }
}


$ cat test2.d
import test;

class Y {
        X.NX nx;
        static class NY {
        }
}


$ dmd -c test2.d test.d
test2.d(3): class test2.Y is forward referenced when looking for 'NY'
test2.d(3): class test2.Y is forward referenced when looking for 'NY'
(...)

dpc@empire:~/stg/tmp$ dmd -c test.d test2.d
test.d(3): class test.X is forward referenced when looking for 'NX'
test.d(3): class test.X is forward referenced when looking for 'NX'
(...)


What I'd like to ask is: "How should I consider this?" to know what should
do with this problem in my code.
A) it's not a bug - it's just little limitation - things shall stay like
this;
B) it an issue, but it will not be fixed sooner than > 1.0;
C) stay tuned, it surly be ready sooner than 1.0;
D) it's fixed already - wait for 0.150 or maybe just little longer.
E) you n00b! you can resolve this already without code modification by
doing: (...);

Thanks,
Dawid

Dawid Ciężarkiewicz wrote:
> It's probably well known issue:
> 
> $ cat test.d
> import test2;
>  class X {
>         Y.NY t;
>         static class NX {
>         }
> }
>   $ cat test2.d
> import test;
>  class Y {
>         X.NX nx;
>         static class NY {
>         }
> }
>   $ dmd -c test2.d test.d
> test2.d(3): class test2.Y is forward referenced when looking for 'NY'
> test2.d(3): class test2.Y is forward referenced when looking for 'NY'
> (...)
>  dpc@empire:~/stg/tmp$ dmd -c test.d test2.d
> test.d(3): class test.X is forward referenced when looking for 'NX'
> test.d(3): class test.X is forward referenced when looking for 'NX'
> (...)
> 
> 
> What I'd like to ask is: "How should I consider this?" to know what should
> do with this problem in my code.
> A) it's not a bug - it's just little limitation - things shall stay like
> this;
> B) it an issue, but it will not be fixed sooner than > 1.0;
> C) stay tuned, it surly be ready sooner than 1.0;
> D) it's fixed already - wait for 0.150 or maybe just little longer.
> E) you n00b! you can resolve this already without code modification by
> doing: (...);
> 
> Thanks,
> Dawid
> 
> 
> 

E) I think.  I believe you should be able to avoid this by changing `import test;` to `private import test;` and likewise for the `import test2;` in the other module.  The private mode import will stop some cycles.

-- Christopher Nicholson-Sauls

Chris Sauls wrote:

> Dawid Ciężarkiewicz wrote:
>> It's probably well known issue:
>> 
>> $ cat test.d
>> import test2;
>> 
>> class X {
>>         Y.NY t;
>>         static class NX {
>>         }
>> }
>> 
>> 
>> $ cat test2.d
>> import test;
>> 
>> class Y {
>>         X.NX nx;
>>         static class NY {
>>         }
>> }
>> 
>> 
>> $ dmd -c test2.d test.d
>> test2.d(3): class test2.Y is forward referenced when looking for 'NY'
>> test2.d(3): class test2.Y is forward referenced when looking for 'NY'
>> (...)
>> 
>> dpc@empire:~/stg/tmp$ dmd -c test.d test2.d
>> test.d(3): class test.X is forward referenced when looking for 'NX'
>> test.d(3): class test.X is forward referenced when looking for 'NX'
>> (...)
>> 
>> 
>> What I'd like to ask is: "How should I consider this?" to know what
>> should do with this problem in my code.
>> A) it's not a bug - it's just little limitation - things shall stay like
>> this;
>> B) it an issue, but it will not be fixed sooner than > 1.0;
>> C) stay tuned, it surly be ready sooner than 1.0;
>> D) it's fixed already - wait for 0.150 or maybe just little longer.
>> E) you n00b! you can resolve this already without code modification by
>> doing: (...);
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Dawid
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> E) I think.  I believe you should be able to avoid this by changing
> `import test;` to
> `private import test;` and likewise for the `import test2;` in the other
> module.  The private mode import will stop some cycles.
> 
> -- Christopher Nicholson-Sauls

That won't help, he is forward referencing a type in the other module from both the modules.