On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 20:27:01 +0000, Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Nov 2013 14:08:50 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
> 
>> Ok, this is it:
>> 
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.i386.rpm
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_i386.deb
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2.exe
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.zip
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.dmg
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_i386.deb
> 
> First, I would like to thank everyone who has put hard work into the
> latest release and am really excited about the enhancements and fixed
> bugs.
> 
> Second, I agree with others that this should have been 2.064, not
> 2.064.2. This is an initial release not a patch/minor release.
> 
> Third, the fix for the issue at https://d.puremagic.com/issues/
> show_bug.cgi?id=10690 was not included in the release and is a blocking
> bug for my company's code base. Till there is a new release with that
> fix included, we will not be able to use 2.064.
> 
> Many thanks again for a great programming language,
> Jonathan from EMSI

I just double checked the code in issue 10690 and it works just fine. I 
had assumed that my code was similar enough to not have been worth an 
additional bug report. I was wrong. I'll log a bug report and try to work 
around the assertion failure in std.algorithm.

Thanks again,
Jonathan

Reply via email to