[reg] fix Issue 11946 - need 'this' to access member when passing field to template parameter #3884
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
I strongly disagree with this. It just makes it harder to manipulate with git as instead of actually reverting the code you've decorated it. |
AndrewEdwards
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 27, 2014
[reg] fix Issue 11946 - need 'this' to access member when passing field to template parameter
9rnsr
pushed a commit
to 9rnsr/dmd
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 28, 2014
[reg] fix Issue 11946 - need 'this' to access member when passing field to template parameter
|
@AndrewEdwards You should not have merged this. |
|
@yebblies So why isn't it already reverted? |
|
Because my concern is with the process, not the actual code. See my comment in #3879 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a reversion of #2794, hopefully without breaking subsequent fixes layered on top of it.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11946
#2794 was not a complete fix, and caused regressions, and so this issue awaits further engineering. I don't think we should be breaking existing code unless we've got a solid solution.
I used conditional compilation in order to make it easier to experiment with solutions. They should be removed once we do decide which direction we should go.
This should be merged into 2.066.