free autocad electrical autodesk full download crack torrent qTFtjAK?I

2010-08-24 Thread ecm2001 winols cpwin rapidshare torrent
We can crack or emulate any protection type: Dongle,
Hardlock, Hasp, Serial, Password, Hasp4, Flexlm, Sentinel,
Wibu, Eutron Smartkey, Hasphl, Proteq, All the Protections!!

email = yshows...@gmail.com
email = yshowsoft at gmail.com

NEW UPDATES 2010

Artpro 9.5r4 with license (minimal of 2 license)
Oris Press Matcher
fiery impose
Fiery Color Profiler 2
Preps 6.0r3



Dynagram Dynastrip v6.0.1
Dynagram inpO2
Artpro 9.0r8 (all modules included)
Esko Visualizer 7.5.5
Esko Softwares Suite V7.5 PC/Mac
Trueflow SE6.0.1 with SPM fully crack

Heidelberg SignaStation v4.5.10.9183
Heidelberg.Prinect.Workflow.4.5.200
Heidelberg Prinect Pressroom Manager v4.0.553.2
Heidelberg MetaShooter v4.0.727
Heidelberg Delta 8.5
Heidelberg.Prinect.MetaDimension.7.5.542
Heidelberg MetaDimension v7.5
Heidelberg Prinect Remote Access v4.0 SR1
Heidelberg.Prinect.Content.System.1.0.SR1
Heidelberg Signastation v9.0.3
Heidelberg PDF Toolbox v4.0.48
Heidelberg Harmony v1.2.1 for Prinergy
Heidelberg NewColor 7000 2.5.2 for Mac
Heidelberg Prinect Signa Station 2.0.7
Heidelberg.Prinect.Common.Database.4.5.17
Heidelberg SignaStation v4.0.0.8202_1
Heidelberg Prinect Prepress Interface v4.1
Heidelberg Color Tool 3.5.35.5
Heidelberg PDF Toolbox v4.0 MAC
Heidelberg Prinect WorkFlow v4.0

We provide Hard lock dongles, dongle cracks, emulators, dongles on any prepress 
softwares.

Nexus 9.0r5 Mac with dongle - NEW
Nexus 8.0r8 Windows with dongle - NEW
GMG ColorProof 5.0 with all options - NEW
Artpro 7.5 Rev. 4 k[ed]
Artpro 8.6r7 k[ed]
Artpro 9.0 r7 with dongle (Minimal of 2 orders) - NEW

==INTERNAL SOFTWARE LIST===

Apago PDF Enhancer 2.6
Apago Piktor 3.0
Agfa Prepress (ApogeeX) v6 - NEW
ColorByte ImagePrint 7.0.3
Compose Color Express 4.2
Compose Express Colorflow 1.6
Compose Express Trap 3.0.9
Compose Express Workflow 3.7
Compose Flatout Express 2.2
Compose PDF Imposition 5.5
Compose Plate Controller 2.0
Compose PRI Station 3.5
Compose Raster PrintStation 2.2
Creo CopyDot ToolKit 4.0
Creo CS Xpose 2.0 - NEW
Creo Darwin 1.0 build 049 (Illustrator plugin)
Creo Darwin 2.0 (InDesign plugin)
Creo Pandora 2.7
Creo Print Console 3.7
Creo PS/M 7.1, 8.0 (MAC OS)
Creo Synapse Prepeare Pro 1.1 (MAC OS)
Creo TrapWise 3.6
Dainippon SCREEN PixelStream 4.6 (Impos2000 Server, InkProof)
Dainippon SCREEN SPEKTA for Harlequin RIP 5.x, 6.x, 7.x
Dainippon SCREEN TrueFlow SE 5.0
- FlatWorker SE 8.0
- SPEKTA 2.0
- TrapEditor 2.07
Devstudio Power Plotter 5.4.26
Dotrix Fortuna 3.5
ECRM MAXWorkFlow 3.5 (all modules)
EFI BEST ColorProof 5.0.1 SP2 (XXL and Laser)
EFI BEST PhotoXposure XXL 5.0.1 SP2
EFI BEST ScreenProof 5.0.1 SP2 (Full and 4UP)
EFI BEST Premium Addon 1.1.0
EFI ColorProof XF 3.1.8
EFI Designer Edition 4.0.0
EFI OneFlow 2.0
EFI PrintSmith 8.0.13
Enfocus PitStop Pro 7.2 (MAC OS) (Acrobat plugin)
Enfocus PitStop Pro 8.5 (Acrobat 9 plugin)
Enfocus PitStop Pro 9.0 (Acrobat 9 plugin)
Enfocus Instant PDF 3.6 (Acrobat plugin)
Enfocus PitStop Server 3.0
ESKO-Graphics Software Suite 7.0 R5
- ArtiosCAD 7.41+ datacenter 4.5 gigabytes. - NEW
- BackStage 7.2
- ColorTone 7.2
- DeskPack 7.0.5 - NEW
- ARD Import
- ARD Export
- BarX
- BoostX
- CheckX
- Flexo Tools
- ImageX
- Ink Tools
- ScreenX
- SeamlessX
- StepX
- Studio - NEW
- Studio toolkit for boxes
- Studio toolkit for flexibles
- OutRight
- TrapX
- ViewX
- FastImpose 7.4
- FlexRIP / FlexProof 7.2
- FlexoPERfection 7.2
- Kaleidoscope 7.4
- PackEdge 7.4
- Plato 7.4
- Visualizer 7.5.5 - NEW
- WebCenter 7.0
ESKO-Graphics ColorQuartet Pro 5.2.2
ESKO-Graphics FlowDrive 5.2
ESKO-Graphics NewAge 2.0
ESKO-Graphics RipMate 7.0
Harlequine Fusion RIP 8.1R0 - NEW
Harlequine ECRM RIP v8.1a - NEW
Harlequin Print Production Manager (PPM) 1.5r0 - NEW
Harlequin JDF Enabler 2.0
Harlequin Compose Express RIP 8.1r0 (Windows  MAC  Linux) - NEW
Harlequin Xitron Navigator RIP 8.1r0 (Windows, Linux  MAC) - NEW
Harlequin PolkaDots Rasterize-it 8.0r6 (Windows  MAC)
Harlequin Dainippon HQ-510PC SCREEN 8.0r0 - NEW
Harlequin (Global Graphics) PLUS Server RIP 8.0r0
Harlequin HighWater Designs Torrent RIP 7.2r1 (Windows  MAC)
Harlequin Xitron Prism RIP 7.2r1
Harlequin Presstek Momentum RIP 7.2r1
Harlequin ECRM RIP 7.1r0
Harlequin OEM RIP 7.0r3
Harlequin RTI RIP-Kit 7.0r0
Harlequin RYBOI PS-RIP IVS 6.3
Harlequin Xitron SDP-RIP 6.0
Harlequin Xeikon RIP 5.3
Harlequin JET RIP 5.51a
Heidelberg Color Tool 3.0.22
Heidelberg Prinect Remote Access v4.0 SR1 - NEW
Heidelberg prinect master data service 3.0 - NEW
Heidelberg Prinect Content System.1.0.SR1 - NEW
Heidelberg Prepress Interfaces v4.1 - NEW
Heidelberg Color Tool 3.5.35.5 - NEW
Heidelberg Prinect Digital Print Manager v4.0.727 - NEW
Heidelberg Prinect Pressroom Manager v4.0.553.2 - NEW
Heidelberg Classic SignaStation 9.0.5
Heidelberg Delta Technology 8.5
Heidelberg NewColor 7000 2.0.0 (Windows  MAC)
Heidelberg Prinect MetaDimension 7.5 - NEW
Heidelberg Prinect MetaShooter 4.0.727
- TIFF ToolBox 4.0
Heidelberg Prinect PDF Toolbox 4.0.55 (Acrobat plugin)
Heidelberg Prinect 

[Issue 4717] std.bitmanip.BitArray changes

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4717


Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au


--- Comment #2 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-08-24 00:33:44 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #0)
 - The count() is also known known as Population or Hamming weight. This is
 useful for Hamming distances, to count bits in many situations, like for
 example for the Sieve of Eratosthenes. There are ways and refined algorithms 
 to
 speed up this operation a lot. And this is a very commonly useful operation. I
 may offer some D code if you want. See also:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamming_weight
 http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html
 And see also the __builtin_popcount() built-in function of GCC.

Curious fact: the built-in popcount instruction isn't much use for bit arrays.
It's great for 64 bit longs (especially for chess programs!) but once you have
a dozen machine words or more, it's faster to add the bits sideways. An
interesting consequence of this is that Intel/AMD's new popcount instruction is
hardly ever useful...

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681


Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au


--- Comment #8 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-08-24 01:30:01 PDT ---
Here's another test case for what I believe is the same thing. It's memory
corruption rather than a segfault. This is a regression since 2.047.

import std.stdio;
import std.array;

void main()
{
Appender!(double[]) b, c;
string[] t;
t ~= q;
t ~= q;
double zzz;
b.put( 111.1 );

for (;;) {
c.put(double.nan);
b.put( 0);

double qqq = b.data()[0];
writefln(%s, qqq);
assert(qqq0);
}
}

111.1
111.1
111.1
111.1
nan
core.exception.asserter...@test(46): Assertion failure

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 3463] Integrate Precise Heap Scanning Into the GC

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3463


nfx...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Attachment #701 is|0   |1
   obsolete||


--- Comment #69 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 01:37:05 PDT ---
Created an attachment (id=737)
 D1 - patch for Tango's runtime to enable precise GC scanning

Same as old patch, updated to newer tango svn.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 3463] Integrate Precise Heap Scanning Into the GC

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3463



--- Comment #70 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 01:40:52 PDT ---
Created an attachment (id=738)
experiment: use ClassInfo to get bitmask for object allocations

objbitmask.patch is a patch on top of tango_precise_gc.patch, which makes
storing the pointer bitmap inline unnecessary. Instead, it assumes that all
memory blocks flagged with BlkAttr.FINALIZE are D objects, and uses their
ClassInfo to get the bitmask. Seems to be slightly slower, but also reduces
space overhead.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4719] New: Clean up associative array runtime interface to enable precise GC

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4719

   Summary: Clean up associative array runtime interface to enable
precise GC
   Product: D
   Version: D1  D2
  Platform: Other
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
  Severity: enhancement
  Priority: P2
 Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: nfx...@gmail.com


--- Comment #0 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 01:58:57 PDT ---
Currently, the AA implementation (in aaA.d) has no way of knowing what the type
of an AA is. All it gets is the key TypeInfo and the value type's size. This
makes precise GC impossible. (Issue 3463 has a compiler patch that adds pointer
bitmaps to TypeInfo. The AA implementation needs these to allocate the AA data
in a way that enables precise scanning.)

This enhancement suggests to clean up the AA runtime interface, that consists
of functions starting with _aa (e.g. _aaGet). All of these functions should
carry a TypeInfo_AssociativeArray reference as parameter.

Note that would actually _reduce_ the number of parameters these runtime
functions typically have, which I find funny.

There may be compatibility concerns. This is simple to solve: the compiler can
just define a new version symbol to signal that a new AA ABI is used. Or if
actual binary compatibility with old code is desired, the old interface could
be emulated in aaA.d by still providing the old functions; the new interface
would use different function names.

PS: not attempting to write a patch, because even if this enhancement gets
accepted, Walter most likely would rewrite the patch himself.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681


nfx...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nfx...@gmail.com


--- Comment #9 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 02:18:39 PDT ---
There's some wtfish code in Appender, that probably tries to emulate how the
runtime allocates arrays. I don't understand why it doesn't simply use the
functions exported by the runtime. Even if not, there's no justification to
duplicate all the code in Phobos, instead of extending the runtime itself.

Or maybe the original author thought a simple function call on array
reallocation is to slow?

Also I doubt using gc_realloc is a good idea: in some cases, gc_realloc frees
memory by force (similar to gc_free), and thus is unsafe in SafeD's definition.
(Although I'm not quite sure if that is the case here.)

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4717] std.bitmanip.BitArray changes

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4717



--- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-24 03:57:46 PDT ---
Answer to Comment 2:
The code in the bithacks site I have given URL of probably is what you were
talking about.
But then there are refined algorithms to use the basic code shown in bithacks,
that becomes useful as the bit array gets a little larger.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4720] New: contracts don't work on function definitions

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4720

   Summary: contracts don't work on function definitions
   Product: D
   Version: D2
  Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: mrmoc...@gmx.de


--- Comment #0 from Trass3r mrmoc...@gmx.de 2010-08-24 05:23:06 PDT ---
The Matlab C headers provide some kind of hand-crafted contracts by defining
extra functions with suffix _d that check all the arguments and then
detouring the calls to the original functions via the preprocessor (#define foo
foo_d)

I tried to leverage D's built-in contract programming but it doesn't work:

module externcontracts;
import externcontracts2;
void foo(int a) in {assert(a=0);}

module externcontracts2;
void foo(int a){}

yields:
externcontracts.d(3): Error: function externcontracts.foo in and out contracts
require function body
resp.
externcontracts.d(3): missing body { ... } after in or out
if you put a ';' after the in{} block


Note that this is exactly the same syntax as for interface contracts.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4717] std.bitmanip.BitArray changes

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4717



--- Comment #4 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-08-24 05:55:05 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
 Answer to Comment 2:
 The code in the bithacks site I have given URL of probably is what you were
 talking about.
 But then there are refined algorithms to use the basic code shown in bithacks,
 that becomes useful as the bit array gets a little larger.

No, that's not what I meant at all. The parallel adding I'm referring to does
not involve any shifts.
You basically implement a half adder. Given 2 words  a, b  the low bit of the
sum is a^b, and the high bit is ab.
And with 3 words a, b, c, the low bit of the sum is a^b^c and the high word is
(ab)|((a^b)c). The popcount is popcount(lo word) + 2* popcount(high word).

So what you do is pass through the array in pairs, grabbing the values a, b.
You accumulate popcount p += 2*popcount((ab)|((a^b)c)). calculate a new carry
c = a^b^c. Then you add p+=popcount(c); at the end. In this way, you've dealt
with two words, but only done one single-word popcount.

In practice, you don't just use pairs, you grab 8 or 16 values at a time, and
keep a 3 or 4 bit sum. You only have to perform one single-word popcount for
every 8 or 16 words. You need to do a lot of logical operations, but they
pipeline quite well.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4720] contracts don't work on function definitions

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4720


Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
   Severity|normal  |enhancement


-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 3463] Integrate Precise Heap Scanning Into the GC

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3463


nfx...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Attachment #700 is|0   |1
   obsolete||


--- Comment #71 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 06:26:56 PDT ---
Created an attachment (id=739)
D1 - patch for dmd for creating pointer bitmasks

don't emit pointer maps for NO_SCAN types (breaks the test program pm.d
included in the other post)

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4717] std.bitmanip.BitArray changes

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4717



--- Comment #5 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-24 06:31:52 PDT ---
I see, I think you are talking about using a SWAR approach then. I have never
used it for this job, but it sounds intersting. I'd like to do some benchmarks
to see what the most efficient solution is among those two.
It looks like a simple problem, but has a surprisingly high number of
interesting solutions.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4721] New: compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721

   Summary: compilation slow when compiling unittests on
dcollections
   Product: D
   Version: D2
  Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: schvei...@yahoo.com


--- Comment #0 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-08-24 
06:44:06 PDT ---
When compiling dcollections unit tests, it takes over 1 minute to compile the
small library.  I am unsure what the exact trigger is to make it slow.  At the
request of Walter, I profiled the compiler to try and see where the slowdown
was.  Here are the first few lines of the results using gprof:

Flat profile:

Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
  %   cumulative   self  self total
 time   seconds   secondscalls  ms/call  ms/call  name
 77.76  6.68 6.68 2952 2.26 2.26  elf_findstr(Outbuffer*,
char const*, char const*)
  2.10  6.86 0.18 4342 0.04 0.04  searchfixlist
  1.28  6.97 0.11   663755 0.00 0.00  ScopeDsymbol::search(Loc,
Identifier*, int)
  1.05  7.06 0.09  2623497 0.00 0.00  isType(Object*)
  0.76  7.12 0.07   911667 0.00 0.00  match(Object*, Object*,
TemplateDeclaration*, Scope*)
  0.76  7.19 0.07   656268 0.00 0.00  _aaGetRvalue(AA*, void*)
  0.58  7.24 0.05  2507041 0.00 0.00  isTuple(Object*)

Walter said it looks like elf_findstr is a problem area and asked me to file
this bug.  The relevant discussion is here:
http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.Darticle_id=116007

All I can say to duplicate this is to download the latest svn of dcollections
and compile unit tests.  If you are running the profiled version, it takes a
long long time to complete (I gave up after 5 minutes).  I suggest compiling
just one class, HashMap.  The compile time for this takes 4 seconds.  The
appropriate commands to run are:

svn co http://svn.dsource.org/projects/dcollections/branches/d2 dcollections
cd dcollections
dmd -unittest dcollections/HashMap.d dcollections/Hash.d
dcollections/Iterators.d dcollections/model/*

The compilation will fail, because there is no main function, but it will
demonstrate the problem well enough.

If you want to compile the entire unit test suite, use the command:

./build-lib-linux.sh unittest

Which builds and runs the unit tests for the whole library.  This takes over a
minute to compile.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721


Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com


--- Comment #1 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 
07:31:19 PDT ---
I don't know about Linux (I might try it in a VM if you want me to), but on
Windows I can compile the collection in 27 seconds:

C:\d2\dcollectionstimeit build-lib-win32.bat unittest
unittest

C:\d2\dcollectionsdmd -unittest unit_test.d  dcollections\ArrayList.d
dcollections\DefaultAllocator
.d dcollections\DefaultFunctions.d dcollections\Hash.d dcollections\HashMap.d
dcollections\HashMulti
set.d dcollections\HashSet.d dcollections\Iterators.d dcollections\Link.d
dcollections\LinkList.d dc
ollections\RBTree.d dcollections\TreeMap.d dcollections\TreeMultiset.d
dcollections\TreeSet.d dcolle
ctions\model\Addable.d dcollections\model\Iterator.d dcollections\model\Keyed.d
dcollections\model\L
ist.d dcollections\model\Map.d dcollections\model\Multiset.d
dcollections\model\Set.d
running unit tests...

Version Number:   Windows NT 5.1 (Build 2600)
Exit Time:4:29 pm, Tuesday, August 24 2010
Elapsed Time: 0:00:27.328
Process Time: 0:00:00.015
System Calls: 161445
Context Switches: 36381
Page Faults:  165602
Bytes Read:   10062897
Bytes Written:5792330
Bytes Other:  131570

This is with DMD 2.046 as stated in the Readme. Do you need my system specs?


With the newer 2.048 I get errors:

C:\d2build-lib-win32.bat unittest
unittest

C:\d2dmd -unittest unit_test.d  dcollections\ArrayList.d
dcollections\DefaultAllocator.d
ctions\Hash.d dcollections\HashMap.d dcollections\HashMultiset.d
dcollections\HashSet.d d
nk.d dcollections\LinkList.d dcollections\RBTree.d dcollections\TreeMap.d
dcollections\Tr
llections\model\Addable.d dcollections\model\Iterator.d
dcollections\model\Keyed.d dcolle
Map.d dcollections\model\Multiset.d dcollections\model\Set.d
std.contracts has been scheduled for deprecation. Please use std.exception
instead.
dcollections\HashSet.d(28): Error: template std.algorithm.find(alias pred = a
== b,R,E)
ryFun!(pred)(haystack.front,needle)) : bool)) does not match any function
template declar
dcollections\HashSet.d(28): Error: template std.algorithm.find(alias pred = a
== b,R,E)
ryFun!(pred)(haystack.front,needle)) : bool)) cannot deduce template function
from argume
),ubyte)
dcollections\HashSet.d(301): Error: template instance
dcollections.HashSet.rangeEqual!(ub
dcollections\HashSet.d(996):instantiated from here: HashSet!(ubyte)
running unit tests...
'.\unit_test' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721



--- Comment #2 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-08-24 
07:49:15 PDT ---
It might be a linux-only problem, I'm not sure.  I also have an older machine,
maybe yours is twice as fast?

27 seconds still seems quite long for a small library.

Re the errors, I'm working on them now, I just downloaded 2.048.  Apparently
there is some issue with AssumeSorted not working as a range anymore...  It's
not critical to the library, but the unit tests use it.  I'm just removing the
assumeSorted for now (as unit test performance isn't important, it was more the
correct thing to do), asked about it in d.learn.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


DMD1 function template broken or did I f.u.?

2010-08-24 Thread 0ffh


Hi, all!

Try this:

--- snip ---

void remove(T)(out T[] array,T element) {
  int r=0,w=0;
  while (rarray.length) {
if (array[r]!=element)
  array[w++]=array[r];
++r;
  }
  array.length=w;
}

void test() {
  int[] array;
  int element=2;
  //
  array=[1,3,2,2,1,3,1,1,2];
  writef(direct\n);
  writef(  before : ,array,\n);
  int r=0,w=0;
  while (rarray.length) {
if (array[r]!=element)
  array[w++]=array[r];
++r;
  }
  array.length=w;
  writef(  after  : ,array,\n);
  //
  array=[1,3,2,2,1,3,1,1,2];
  writef(template\n);
  writef(  before : ,array,\n);
  remove!(int)(array,element);
  writef(  after  : ,array,\n);
}

--- snap ---

I get the following output:

direct
  before : [1,3,2,2,1,3,1,1,2]
  after  : [1,3,1,3,1,1]
template
  before : [1,3,2,2,1,3,1,1,2]
  after  : []

So, my question is: Huh?

Kind regards.





Re: DMD1 function template broken or did I f.u.?

2010-08-24 Thread Steven Schveighoffer
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:18:35 -0400, 0ffh  
fr...@youknow.what.todo.internetz wrote:




Hi, all!

Try this:

--- snip ---

void remove(T)(out T[] array,T element) {
   int r=0,w=0;
   while (rarray.length) {
 if (array[r]!=element)
   array[w++]=array[r];
 ++r;
   }
   array.length=w;
}

void test() {
   int[] array;
   int element=2;
   //
   array=[1,3,2,2,1,3,1,1,2];
   writef(direct\n);
   writef(  before : ,array,\n);
   int r=0,w=0;
   while (rarray.length) {
 if (array[r]!=element)
   array[w++]=array[r];
 ++r;
   }
   array.length=w;
   writef(  after  : ,array,\n);
   //
   array=[1,3,2,2,1,3,1,1,2];
   writef(template\n);
   writef(  before : ,array,\n);
   remove!(int)(array,element);
   writef(  after  : ,array,\n);
}

--- snap ---

I get the following output:

direct
   before : [1,3,2,2,1,3,1,1,2]
   after  : [1,3,1,3,1,1]
template
   before : [1,3,2,2,1,3,1,1,2]
   after  : []

So, my question is: Huh?


s/out/ref

out means return this argument by reference, but initialize it to its  
initial value first which for arrays means, a null array.


ref means pass the argument by reference.

Also, btw, you should not need to specifically call the !int version, you  
can just do remove(array, element).


-Steve


Re: DMD1 function template broken or did I f.u.?

2010-08-24 Thread Simen kjaeraas

0ffh fr...@youknow.what.todo.internetz wrote:


So, my question is: Huh?


The answer to this should for symmetry be: Duh!
However, it is not quite that simple.



void remove(T)(out T[] array,T element) {


This is the line that gives you problems. You are expecting 'out' to
work like 'ref', which it doesn't. From [1]: out parameters are set to
the default initializer for the type of it.

Also, this newsgroup is for automated messages from D's Bugzilla. You
might want to ask this kind of questions in digitalmars.D.learn in the
future.

[1]: http://digitalmars.com/d/2.0/function.html#parameters
--
Simen


[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721



--- Comment #3 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 
09:55:25 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
 It might be a linux-only problem, I'm not sure.  I also have an older machine,
 maybe yours is twice as fast?
 
 27 seconds still seems quite long for a small library.
 
 Re the errors, I'm working on them now, I just downloaded 2.048.  Apparently
 there is some issue with AssumeSorted not working as a range anymore...  It's
 not critical to the library, but the unit tests use it.  I'm just removing the
 assumeSorted for now (as unit test performance isn't important, it was more 
 the
 correct thing to do), asked about it in d.learn.

Yeah I guess it could be rather long, there's not that many size and they're
mostly small from what I can tell.

Btw your updated d2.0b library now compiles in 11 seconds on my system with DMD
2.048.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721



--- Comment #4 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 
09:55:55 PDT ---
* not that many files, not size.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721



--- Comment #5 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-08-24 
10:13:43 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
y small from what I can tell.
 
 Btw your updated d2.0b library now compiles in 11 seconds on my system with 
 DMD
 2.048.

Still over a minute for me on Linux 2.048.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 3682] Regression(2.038) is expression fails to match types

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3682



--- Comment #3 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-08-24 12:39:36 PDT ---
Reduced testcase shows that it doesn't require -unittest, and it is D2-only.

--- a3682.d--

struct Tuple(Types...)
{
Tuple!(Types[0..1]) slice()()
{
Tuple!(Types[0..1]) x;
return x;
}

void fail()
{
Tuple!(float, double, int) a;
auto s = a.slice();
static assert(is(typeof(s) == Tuple!(float)));
}
}

 b3682.d--

import a3682;
alias Tuple!(int) tint;
--

 dmd a3682 b3682
a3682.d(14): Error: static assert  (is(Tuple!(float) == Tuple!(float))) is
false
a3682.d(4):instantiated from here: Tuple!(float)
a3682.d(13):instantiated from here: slice!()
a3682.d(12):instantiated from here: Tuple!(float,double,int)
b3682.d(2):instantiated from here: Tuple!(int)

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4717] std.bitmanip.BitArray changes

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4717



--- Comment #6 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-24 14:02:31 PDT ---
For efficiency on 64 bit systems too you may change this code from the BitArray
struct:

struct BitArray
{
size_t len;
uint* ptr;

...

void init(void[] v, size_t numbits)
in
{
assert(numbits = v.length * 8);
assert((v.length  3) == 0);
}



Into:

struct BitArray
{
size_t len;
size_t* ptr; // changed here

...

void init(void[] v, size_t numbits)
in
{
assert(numbits = v.length * 8);
assert(v.length % size_t.sizeof == 0); // changed here
}

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721



--- Comment #6 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-08-24 
14:10:26 PDT ---
More testing, I did some printf debugging.

According to the comments and the code of the function, it's a *linear* search
through the symbol table for a match to a given symbol + suffix.

The symbol table is a null-separated single buffer.  So not only is it linear
through the strings, but it's linear on the *characters*.  That is, when
comparing the current symbol and it's a mismatch, the code must iterate through
all the characters anyways to find the next null character.

I added some printouts to determine the eventual size of the symbol table, and
the number of times the function is called.  I also added printouts to show the
number of matches found (those should theoretically not do a linear search
through the entire table, but likely would search through most of it).

The eventual numbers for dcollections:

symbol table size: 4,253,953
number of calls:   12,677
number of matches: 648

doing the math, thats probably conservatively about 20 billion loop iterations
-- way unacceptable for something that should be done via a hash lookup, or at
least a tree/trie/binary search.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 3725] Add united type to standard library

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3725


Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jmdavisp...@gmail.com


--- Comment #4 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmail.com 2010-08-24 
17:05:22 PDT ---
Oh my. Was it going too fast? ;)

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4722] New: Debug Phobos lib

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4722

   Summary: Debug Phobos lib
   Product: D
   Version: D2
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
  Severity: enhancement
  Priority: P2
 Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: bearophile_h...@eml.cc


--- Comment #0 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-24 19:51:16 PDT ---
This is one example from Phobos, a small part of std.bitmanip.BitArray:


void init(void[] v, size_t numbits)
in
{
assert(numbits = v.length * 8);
assert((v.length  3) == 0);
}
body
{
ptr = cast(uint*)v.ptr;
len = numbits;
}



But if you compile (with no compilation arguments but the file name) this wrong
program runs, with no runtime errors:


import std.bitmanip: BitArray;
void main() {
ubyte[4] data;
BitArray bits;
bits.init(data, 100);
}


The problem is real, but I don't know if the following suggestion is stupid or
impossible. 

The idea is to have two precompiled libs, like phobos.lib and phobos_debug.lib
(where the debug one contains the asserts too), and DMD (or rmdm) may pick
phobos.lib if the -release switch is used, and use phobos_debug.lib otherwise.
This may allow to replace the enforce() in Phobos with normal asserts inside
DbC contracts.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---


[Issue 4688] [patch] rdmd/Win: rdmd'ed program's output appears after cmd prompt

2010-08-24 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4688



--- Comment #4 from Nick Sabalausky cbkbbej...@mailinator.com 2010-08-24 
21:42:18 PDT ---
Note that this bug is not just cosmetic: It causes problems for programs that
launch rdmd through a system() call. The system() call will return *before*
the rdmd'ed program runs which causes a (repeatable) race problem.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---