digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 10552] New: Cannot apply access specifiers to individual anonymous enum members
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (26/27) Jul 05 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (11/11) Jul 05 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (16/26) Jul 06 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (10/21) Jul 06 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (9/32) Jul 06 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (9/9) Jul 09 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (6/6) Jul 09 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552 Summary: Cannot apply access specifiers to individual anonymous enum members Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Keywords: rejects-valid Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com ReportedBy: andrej.mitrovich gmail.com 14:00:15 PDT --- ----- enum { private A = 1, B = 2, } ----- $ dmd test.dError: basic type expected, not private-- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 05 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552 Henning Pohl <henning still-hidden.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |pull CC| |henning still-hidden.de PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/2304 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 05 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552----- enum { private A = 1, B = 2, } ----- $ dmd test.dI cannot see any benefits there. You can just separate public anonymous enum and private one. private enum { A = 1, } enum { B = 2, } -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------Error: basic type expected, not private
Jul 06 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552 PDT ---I cannot see any benefits there. You can just separate public anonymous enum and private one. private enum { A = 1, } enum { B = 2, }This has some drawbacks: 1) You have to write a new enum. 2) You cannot take advantage of the properties of anonymous enums. 3) Constants that belong together need to be defined at the same place. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 06 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552 07:08:29 PDT ---I see it as an unnecessary limitation, each member can have its own type and its own initializer (even its own UDA), but not an access specifier. Note that due to Issue 10552 we can use neither syntax. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------------ enum { private A = 1, B = 2, } ----- $ dmd test.dI cannot see any benefits there. You can just separate public anonymous enum and private one. private enum { A = 1, } enum { B = 2, }Error: basic type expected, not private
Jul 06 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552 Walter Bright <bugzilla digitalmars.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bugzilla digitalmars.com Severity|normal |enhancement -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 09 2013
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10552 12:20:51 PDT --- Language changes are enhancements, not bug fixes. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 09 2013