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 16607 - forward reference error for nested struct #6214

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 27, 2016

Conversation

MartinNowak
Copy link
Member

  • This reverts removing the AggregateDeclaration.setScope override (see
    75b5b69) and fixes a wrong error triggered by setting _scope on a
    SIZEOKdone struct during deferred setScope phases (outer struct has
    forward references).

- This reverts removing the AggregateDeclaration.setScope override (see
  75b5b69) and fixes a wrong error triggered by setting _scope on a
  SIZEOKdone struct during deferred setScope phases (outer struct has
  forward references).
@dlang-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Fix Bugzilla Description
16607 [REG2.072b1] forward reference error for nested struct

@MartinNowak MartinNowak added the Regression PRs that fix regressions label Oct 25, 2016
@MartinNowak MartinNowak added this to the 2.072.0 milestone Oct 25, 2016
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
struct A(T)
{
T t; // causes A to be SIZEOKfwd b/c B (passed as T) isn't yet done
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you! But would it be much to ask to avoid shortening words in commits in the future? They might not be very accessible to everyone depending on their English level.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mmh, only unwillingly, I'm fairly used to that style and have a lot of stuff to type each day.
I wouldn't do that in a changelog entry or specs, but I don't see how that increases any hurdle.
If you're already starring at test16607.d, you're deep into mud anyhow.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, never mind.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for raising this, getting understood is important, and this is a useful consideration.

Copy link
Member

@UplinkCoder UplinkCoder left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me.

@WalterBright WalterBright merged commit 9dfa50e into dlang:stable Oct 27, 2016
@MartinNowak MartinNowak deleted the fix16607 branch October 31, 2016 22:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Regression PRs that fix regressions
Projects
None yet
5 participants