DIP31: compile time paradoxes defined. Requested examples added

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP31

I've been asked to add examples of resolution for various cases
(hint they all error out).

[Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d]

Post by deadalnix via Digitalmars-d
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP31
I've been asked to add examples of resolution for various cases (hint
they all error out).

"This DIP define their behavior properly, "

Not really. For one thing, at the moment, the DIP doesn't really make
clear when and how a 'dependency' occurs.

"Mixin are resolved in order, which mean the first mixin is resolved first."

What do you mean? There is no order; there is no 'first' mixin.

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

Post by Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d

Post by deadalnix via Digitalmars-d
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP31
I've been asked to add examples of resolution for various
cases (hint
they all error out).

"This DIP define their behavior properly, "
Not really. For one thing, at the moment, the DIP doesn't
really make clear when and how a 'dependency' occurs.

This is why I'm working on a DIP for identifier resolution.
Indeed, this DIP depend on identifier being resolved in a precise
manner to get predictible results.

Post by Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d
"Mixin are resolved in order, which mean the first mixin is
resolved first."
What do you mean? There is no order; there is no 'first' mixin.

In order in the file. This is already specified in the DIP. Yes,
when several modules are involved, there is an hole. I have no
idea how to plug that one.