Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix Issue 21680 - inconsistent error on typeof({ return field; }()) #12251

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 5, 2021

Conversation

BorisCarvajal
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@dlang-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for your pull request and interest in making D better, @BorisCarvajal! We are looking forward to reviewing it, and you should be hearing from a maintainer soon.
Please verify that your PR follows this checklist:

  • My PR is fully covered with tests (you can see the coverage diff by visiting the details link of the codecov check)
  • My PR is as minimal as possible (smaller, focused PRs are easier to review than big ones)
  • I have provided a detailed rationale explaining my changes
  • New or modified functions have Ddoc comments (with Params: and Returns:)

Please see CONTRIBUTING.md for more information.


If you have addressed all reviews or aren't sure how to proceed, don't hesitate to ping us with a simple comment.

Bugzilla references

Auto-close Bugzilla Severity Description
21680 normal inconsistent error on typeof\(\{ return field; \}\(\)\)

Testing this PR locally

If you don't have a local development environment setup, you can use Digger to test this PR:

dub run digger -- build "master + dmd#12251"

@dlang-bot dlang-bot merged commit 343ebe8 into dlang:master Mar 5, 2021
@Geod24
Copy link
Member

Geod24 commented Mar 5, 2021

Such a simple bugfix could have gone to stable BTW.

@WalterBright
Copy link
Member

It might be simple in terms of lines of code, but forward reference tweaking has historically been a minefield.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants