Meghan Denny
Meghan Denny
its been brought to my attention the second point was unnecessary because `>>=` already does this behavior. imo the proposal still stands though
https://sourcegraph.com/search?q=context:global+lang:Zig+%3C%3C%7C&patternType=keyword&sm=0 only surfaces Zig itself and two outside cases that could use `
if it reproduces on the latest clang as well, we generally still track it here if it's affecting zig
then the person should replace their call with `@panic` + `std.fmt.[alloc|buf]Print`
i think not changing the grammar is the right move
wrapping the `switch` in `@as(E, ...)` makes it work but the result location of it being passed as an argument should make that unnecessary
you might need `b.installArtifact(exe);` edit: relevant pr + issue https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pull/15245
this is a rabbit hole of un-reproducibile builds and an anti-pattern > I think this would mostly be useful for when operating on local forks of code that aren't published...
there is no leak since allocators only identify the data returned to you by the address of the first element.
I admit I could have been a bit more clear in my response earlier but I was only describing the current behavior and why it was working as designed and...