On 08/13/2015 12:01 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote: > I agree to these semtiments about y2lx(p1). I have no idea who or why > someone thought it was considered a good idea to add it to CTFE in the > first place.
B/C we were missing log and exp functions in CTFE, but of course actually using log and exp would have made more sense. This is getting OT though.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
