On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 20:37:56 +0000, Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote: > 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
Disregard the last post. The issue still exists; I was just looking at the wrong file.
