[nem-en] No parsetree body accessible

[Dmitry Ivankov]

On 6/20/07, Kamil Skalski <kamil.skalski at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Most probably this is because of initializer. At the moment of typing
> method body constructors are already typed and you cannot add the
> initialization code to them.


Yes, looks like it.
Nested class with static initialized field seems to work, I'll try to use it
instead.

On 6/20/07, Michal Moskal <michal.moskal at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Maybe we should hack the compiler, to type the static constructor last
> (and maybe normal constructors next to last)? I don't see this being
> problematic in any case, and in some cases (like this one) it would be
> useful.

I agree, it would be useful
hack. But probably typing in that order isn't always possible, so it
shouldn't be relied on too much :)


And returning to wiki & tb.CannotFinalize: should it be just removed
from examples,
or that property was somehow renamed or replaced with another one?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /mailman/pipermail/devel-en/attachments/20070619/ddac7ea0/attachment.html