digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 6251] New: D spec should warn about using foreach_reverse on a delegate
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (24/24) Jul 05 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (10/10) Jul 05 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (14/14) Jul 08 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (10/10) Jul 08 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (9/9) Jan 24 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (14/14) Feb 06 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (14/16) Feb 06 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (6/6) Feb 06 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
Summary: D spec should warn about using foreach_reverse on a
delegate
Product: D
Version: D1 & D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: websites
AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
ReportedBy: schveiguy yahoo.com
--- Comment #0 from Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> 2011-07-05
04:00:17 PDT ---
Currently, foreach_reverse on a delegate is equivalent to using foreach on a
delegate. A novice user might expect foreach_reverse to somehow force the
delegate to iterate its elements in reverse. In order to prevent more bugs
being filed on this issue, the documentation should specifically identify that
foreach_reverse on a delegate does not reverse the order of iteration, and so
should not be used.
This is related to bug 1553
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 05 2011
d-bugmail puremagic.com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |spec
CC| |thecybershadow gmail.com
Severity|normal |minor
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 05 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
Stewart Gordon <smjg iname.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |smjg iname.com
--- Comment #1 from Stewart Gordon <smjg iname.com> 2011-07-08 15:05:39 PDT ---
It took me a moment to make sense of it. So it basically calls the delegate
applied to the body of the foreach statement in the same way as foreach
(element; object) calls the object's opApply on the body of the foreach
statement?
On this basis, surely foreach_reverse over a delegate should be just illegal?
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 08 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jmdavisProg gmx.com
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> 2011-07-08 15:19:55
PDT ---
Bug# 1553
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 08 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
Walter Bright <bugzilla digitalmars.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |bugzilla digitalmars.com
Severity|minor |enhancement
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 24 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
Yao Gomez <yao.gomez gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC| |yao.gomez gmail.com
Resolution| |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Yao Gomez <yao.gomez gmail.com> 2012-02-06 13:05:24 PST ---
In the comments of issue 1553 there are an initiative to add documentation
about this issue.
*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 1553 ***
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 06 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251
Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|DUPLICATE |
--- Comment #4 from Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> 2012-02-06
13:48:43 PST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
In the comments of issue 1553 there are an initiative to add documentation
about this issue.
This is *not* a duplicate, it's a direct result of Walter closing bug 1553
saying updating the documentation should be fine. This bug report *is* the
initiative to add documentation!
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 06 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6251 --- Comment #5 from Yao Gomez <yao.gomez gmail.com> 2012-02-06 13:59:40 PST --- Ah OK. Apologies. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 06 2012