[Issue 4106] Error without line number accessing member of nonexistent struct member (D1 only)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4106 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-11-26 00:08:38 PST --- Fixed for DMD1 in svn 738. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4371] segfault(template.c) template tuple [misuse?]
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4371
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-11-26 00:44:26 PST ---
There are two issues:
(1) deduceType() can return a tuple. This causes the segfault, because it isn't
a type.
Fixing that stops the crash, but the code still doesn't work, because...
(2) Same as bug 5164: it shouldn't try to add the symbol twice. Exactly the
same fix works here.
PATCH: expression.c, line 5185, IsExp::semantic().
--
Lyes:
if (id)
{
-Dsymbol *s = new AliasDeclaration(loc, id, tded);
+Dsymbol *s;
+if (isTuple(tded))
+s = new TupleDeclaration(loc, id, (isTuple(tded)-objects));
+else
+s = new AliasDeclaration(loc, id, tded);
s-semantic(sc);
-if (!sc-insert(s))
-error(declaration %s is already defined, s-toChars());
if (sc-sd)
s-addMember(sc, sc-sd, 1);
+else if (!sc-insert(s))
+error(declaration %s is already defined, s-toChars());
}
//printf(Lyes\n);
return new IntegerExp(loc, 1, Type::tbool);
Lno:
//printf(Lno\n);
return new IntegerExp(loc, 0, Type::tbool);
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4371] segfault(template.c) template tuple in is() expression
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4371 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code Summary|segfault(template.c)|segfault(template.c) |template tuple [misuse?]|template tuple in is() ||expression OS/Version|Linux |All --- Comment #2 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-11-26 00:46:05 PST --- And the code was valid. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5266] Windows sample code different on website and in samples directory
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5266 Simen Kjaeraas simen.kja...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Simen Kjaeraas simen.kja...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 00:48:50 PST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5268 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5268] Outdated windows GUI sample in Samples folder
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5268 Simen Kjaeraas simen.kja...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||simen.kja...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Simen Kjaeraas simen.kja...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 00:48:50 PST --- *** Issue 5266 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4172] Improve varargs
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4172 --- Comment #4 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 01:00:56 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) The clean way to fix this (and what LDC does) is to pack all arguments (aligning them) in a stack allocated array, create the typeinfo array, and then call the function passing to it a void* to the packed array and the typeinfo array. Doesn't dmd do the same? Yeah, it looks like dmd on 64 bit will emulate the old shitty way that was natural for dmd on 32 bit. But I don't understand why you would WANT to do that. Why emulate something broken and hard to use? Passing an array of void* to each parameter (see _argarray in issue description) would be so much easier. More handy way is to pack arguments into struct and pass single TypeInfo for that struct. It already has all necessary align and offset info there. Not sure what you mean by that. There's no RTTI for struct members, so this would be very not-useful. You'd still need to pass _arguments, and you'd still need to follow the ABI for the struct layout (granted, better than trying to follow the stack layout). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2246] Regression(2.046, 1.061): Specialization of template to template containing int arguments fails
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2246 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au Platform|PowerPC |All Summary|specialization of template |Regression(2.046, 1.061): |to template containing int |Specialization of template |arguments fails |to template containing int ||arguments fails OS/Version|Mac OS X|All Severity|normal |regression --- Comment #2 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-11-26 01:16:51 PST --- The code actually worked for a long time, but was broken again in 2.046. Possibly caused by the bugfix for bug 945. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3896] Broken links
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3896 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-11-26 05:06:51 PST --- Fixed svn 1665. Included in DMD2.048 and later. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5277] New: Member functions that modify its own state wrongfully marked as strongly pure.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5277
Summary: Member functions that modify its own state wrongfully
marked as strongly pure.
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: blocker
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: ibuc...@ubuntu.com
--- Comment #0 from Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com 2010-11-26 09:11:35 PST ---
Consider:
struct Foo {
uint num = 0;
void incNum() pure nothrow{
num++;
}
}
incNum gets marked as PUREstrong, when I feel that it should really be PUREweak
as it clearly has side effects.
Regards
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5278] New: DMD generates programs that immediately segfault.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5278
Summary: DMD generates programs that immediately segfault.
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: x86
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: blocker
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: chadj...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Chad Joan chadj...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 09:34:48 PST ---
My program is this:
void main() {}
My bash session looks like this:
$ dmd main.d -v
binarydmd
version v2.050
config/usr/local/share/dcompilers/dmd/linux/bin/dmd.conf
parse main
importall main
importobject
(/usr/local/share/dcompilers/dmd/linux/bin/../../src/druntime/import/object.di)
semantic main
semantic2 main
semantic3 main
code main
function main
gcc main.o -o main -m32 -Xlinker
-L/usr/local/share/dcompilers/dmd/linux/bin/../lib -Xlinker --export-dynamic
-lphobos2 -lpthread -lm
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.3.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
warning: creating a DT_TEXTREL in object.
$ ./main
Segmentation fault
I'm on 64-bit Gentoo Linux, though I am creating 32-bit executables like
normal. This is a problem for dmd v2.050 and v2.049. v2.048 runs just fine,
though it also makes the linker complain about creating a DT_TEXTREL in
object.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5278] DMD generates programs that immediately segfault.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5278 --- Comment #1 from Chad Joan chadj...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 09:38:22 PST --- Additional note: as far as I can tell this afflicts ALL programs I write with DMD, not just the trivial do-nothing program. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 107] Wrong filename in error message when using a mixin
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=107 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #5 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 10:03:49 PST --- Could not reproduce on dmd 2.050, it probably was fixed a few releases ago for both D1 and D2. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 143] 'package' does not work at all
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=143 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 129] DDoc makes enum values cryptic
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=129 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #9 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 10:16:42 PST --- Tried with dmd 1.065 and dmd 2.050, bug seems to be fixed. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 144] Alias and function names fail to collide
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=144 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 176] [module] message module and package have the same name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 10:26:37 PST --- I cannot reproduce this on 2.065, so I assume it has been fixed. The errror message is now: test2.d: Error: module test2 from file test2.d conflicts with another module test2 from file test.d -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 178] Fixed-path locations for specific modules
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=178 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 10:32:09 PST --- Tried this with 2.065, intrinsic may sit alongside with object.d. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 235] goto scope: cannot goto forward into different try block level
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=235 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Severity|critical|normal --- Comment #10 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 10:35:59 PST --- Downgrading severity as there are plenty of workarounds. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 198] DDoc: superclass/interface decl expansion
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=198 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 242] template implicit template properties doesn't work
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=242 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||INVALID AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 255] Odd performance difference w/ complex doubles.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=255 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 257] package vars accessible from sub-modules, package funcs not
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=257 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4172] Improve varargs
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4172 --- Comment #5 from Sobirari Muhomori dfj1es...@sneakemail.com 2010-11-26 10:43:31 PST --- TypeInfo has offTi property that returns OffsetTypeInfo[], which is exactly what you want - types and offsets of struct members. What problem do you have with struct layout? You can't sum address of struct and field offset to get address of field? Anyway, if reflection in D is awful, may be it's better to make it usable rather than burden the compiler with work that can be done by reflection but is not done yet? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 259] Comparing signed to unsigned does not generate an error
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=259 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|major |critical --- Comment #18 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 10:43:45 PST --- Escalating severity of this dangerous issue. Has 11 votes, too. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 176] [module] message module and package have the same name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #4 from Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 10:50:51 PST --- /tmp/dmd/dmd$ ./linux/bin/dmd | head -n 1 Digital Mars D Compiler v1.065 /tmp/dmd/dmd$ cat test.d module test2; import test2; import test2.A; // (2) this wrong import can in another file /tmp/dmd/dmd$ cat test2.d module test2; /tmp/dmd/dmd$ ./linux/bin/dmd -c test.d test.d: Error: module test2 module and package have the same name -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 107] Wrong filename in error message when using a mixin
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=107
Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC||llu...@gmail.com
Resolution|FIXED |
--- Comment #6 from Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 11:03:32
PST ---
l...@homero:/tmp/dmd/dmd$ cat -n mixin_21_A.d
1 // $HeadURL: http://dstress.kuehne.cn/compile/m/mixin_21_A.d $
2 // $Date: 2006-12-31 20:58:06 +0100 (Sun, 31 Dec 2006) $
3 // $Author: thomask $
4
5 // @author@ ben...@tionex.de
6 // @date@ 2006-04-15
7 // @uri@http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=107
8
9 module mixin_21_A;
10
11 template T(){
12 UNDEFINED x;
13 }
14
l...@homero:/tmp/dmd/dmd$ cat -n mixin_21_B.d
1 // $HeadURL: http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/m/mixin_21_B.d $
2 // $Date: 2006-12-31 20:58:06 +0100 (Sun, 31 Dec 2006) $
3 // $Author: thomask $
4
5 // @author@ ben...@tionex.de
6 // @date@ 2006-04-15
7 // @uri@http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=107
8
9 // __DSTRESS_ELINE__ 15
10
11 module mixin_21_B;
12
13 import mixin_21_A;
14
15 mixin T!();
16
l...@homero:/tmp/dmd/dmd$ ./linux/bin/dmd -c mixin_21_B.d
mixin_21_A.d(12): Error: identifier 'UNDEFINED' is not defined
mixin_21_A.d(12): Error: UNDEFINED is used as a type
mixin_21_B.d(12): Error: variable mixin_21_B.T!().x voids have no value
mixin_21_B.d(15): Error: mixin mixin_21_B.T!() error instantiating
l...@homero:/tmp/dmd/dmd$ ./linux/bin/dmd | head -n 1
Digital Mars D Compiler v1.065
Note that the 3er error is WRONG (line 12 in mixin_21_B.d is blank)
Andrei, this is the second bug you close that is NOT fixed. PLEASE, PLEASE, be
a little more careful testing the bugs before you close them. It's not very
serious, really.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 176] [module] message module and package have the same name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|0.160 |D1 --- Comment #5 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:04:30 PST --- Marked issue as D1. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 275] Undefined identifier in instances of templates with forward mixins
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=275 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 176] [module] message module and package have the same name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|D1 |D1 D2 --- Comment #6 from Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 11:14:17 PST --- Are you kidding me? :) /tmp/dmd/dmd2$ ./linux/bin/dmd | head -n 1 Digital Mars D Compiler v2.050 /tmp/dmd/dmd2$ ./linux/bin/dmd -c test.d test.d: Error: module test2 module and package have the same name Marked as D1 D2. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 107] Wrong filename in error message when using a mixin
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=107 --- Comment #8 from Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 11:17:36 PST --- (In reply to comment #7) Marking as a D1 only issue. Sorry for not testing with D1 too; I wrongly assumed that most bugs will get fixed simultaneously on D1 and D2. OK, I confirmed this one is really D1 only :) -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 176] [module] message module and package have the same name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 --- Comment #7 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:20:05 PST --- Just reproduced it now. I must've made a mistake earlier. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 176] [module] message module and package have the same name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #8 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:20:31 PST --- Assigning to Walter. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 176] [module] message module and package have the same name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 --- Comment #9 from Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 11:22:16 PST --- (In reply to comment #7) Just reproduced it now. I must've made a mistake earlier. In the comments, you were compiling test2.d and the problem is when compiling test.d, I guess that was the root of the confusion. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 107] Wrong filename in error message when using a mixin
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=107 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #9 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:22:29 PST --- Assigning to Walter. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 339] Alias of function pointer type cannot be forward referenced (D1 only)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=339 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #4 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:25:51 PST --- Could not reproduce in 1.065 and 2.050. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 463] [module] private module members have global bindings instead of local ones
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=463 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 472] zero sized _init_* symtab-objects
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=472 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 391] .sort and .reverse break utf8 encoding
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=391 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Version|1.00|D1 D2 --- Comment #6 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:30:22 PST --- Don's latest fails both on 1.065 and 2.050. Marking as a D1 D2 issue. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 481] Letting compiler determine length for fixed-length arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=481 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #1 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:36:34 PST --- This enhancement's importance is raised by the fact that array literals have dynamic length by default, so simply writing auto a = [1,2,3,4]; won't make a of type int[4]. I think using [$] is the most sensible option. The special meaning of length inside array brackets needs to be eliminated anyway, and [auto] may confuse people into thinking it's an associative array. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 492] Use the fully qualified module name for output files rather than the source file path.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=492 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 519] Invariant not called from autogenerated constructor
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=519
Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||and...@metalanguage.com
AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com
--- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26
11:39:12 PST ---
The example needs parens:
class Foo {
// this() {}
invariant {
assert (false);
}
}
void main() {
Foo foo = new Foo();
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 519] Invariant not called from autogenerated constructor
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=519
--- Comment #4 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26
11:39:39 PST ---
Forgot to add the actual parens :o).
class Foo {
// this() {}
invariant() {
assert (false);
}
}
void main() {
Foo foo = new Foo();
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 538] Can't return an expression tuple from a function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=538 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #6 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:42:37 PST --- This will not be fixed. D1 is frozen and D2 has Tuple. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5221] entity.c: Merge Walter's list with Thomas'
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5221 --- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com 2010-11-26 11:42:28 PST --- Created an attachment (id=834) Updated merge. Yikes! I didn't know my last update was going to do *that*. Sorry for any noise, here's an updated patch against the svn, adds some bits, corrects some mistakes in Thomas' list. Checked and tested against the testsuite. =) Regards -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 539] can't instantiate nested template of same name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=539 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 11:54:27 PST --- This is by design. There is no way to avoid the eponymous rewrite. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 568] Support to implicitly deduce class template in function template
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=568 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 12:06:46 PST --- First round of examples now work on 1.065 and 2.050. The second round is invalid. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 596] Support array, arrayliteral and struct in switch and case
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=596 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 481] Letting compiler determine length for fixed-length arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=481
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc
--- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 12:24:55 PST ---
I agree that this syntax is good:
int[$] arr = [1,2,3,4];
But it solves only half of the problem.
Currently this compiles:
int[4] a = [1, 2, 3];
void main() {}
While this generates:
object.Exception: lengths don't match for array copy
void main() {
int[4] a = [1, 2, 3];
}
They are two different situations. But they don't look different, the first
just look like a special case.
To solve the second half of the problem someone has suggested this syntax that
looks good enough:
int[4] a = [1, 2, 3, ...];
a[3] is filled with typeof(a[0]).init.
For more info see bug 3849
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 602] Compiler allows a goto statement to skip an initalization
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=602 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Version|0.175 |D1 D2 AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 611] IsExpression fails when inside implemented interface
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=611 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4371] segfault(template.c) template tuple in is() expression
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4371 --- Comment #3 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-11-26 12:35:50 PST --- There's something wrong with the patch. This part breaks Phobos unit tests: -if (!sc-insert(s)) -error(declaration %s is already defined, s-toChars()); if (sc-sd) s-addMember(sc, sc-sd, 1); +else if (!sc-insert(s)) +error(declaration %s is already defined, s-toChars()); Changing the first of those lines to: if (!isTuple(tded) !sc-insert(s)) error(declaration %s is already defined, s-toChars()); allows the test code to compile. But I don't really understand why it should be necessary. Possibly it's another bug which is being triggered. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 620] Can't use property syntax with a template function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=620 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 596] Support array, arrayliteral and struct in switch and case
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=596 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 12:37:59 PST --- If structs become supported by switch, then an interesting use case is to support Tuples of typecons too. (A possible enhancement is to support class references too (comparing the dynamic type), but similar switches on objects is considered a bad practice in OO code. So maybe it's better to not support class references). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 625] [module] static import and renamed import of mixin don't work
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=625 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 622] There should be a warning for unininitalized class reference
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=622 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 644] Ddoc: aliases used as parameters/fields revert to base type in generated docs.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=644 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 658] struct pointers in with()
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=658 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 660] Incorrect protection error message
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=660 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 662] Support functions as basictypes and enum properties
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=662 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4646] src/phobos/linux.mak STD_MODULES definition
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4646 Witold Baryluk bary...@smp.if.uj.edu.pl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bary...@smp.if.uj.edu.pl --- Comment #2 from Witold Baryluk bary...@smp.if.uj.edu.pl 2010-11-26 13:19:34 PST --- *** Issue 5267 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5267] phobos' linux.mak do not build std/exception.d
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5267 Witold Baryluk bary...@smp.if.uj.edu.pl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Witold Baryluk bary...@smp.if.uj.edu.pl 2010-11-26 13:19:34 PST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 4646 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 664] is(func T == function) ignores variadic arguments
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=664 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 13:22:37 PST --- Fixed URLs: http://dstress.kuehne.cn/compile/i/is_16_A.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/compile/i/is_16_B.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/compile/i/is_16_C.d -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 676] These two funcs shouldn't conflict
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=676 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #5 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 13:26:52 PST --- I'll leave the decision to Walter. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 678] Compiler accepts, for a function T[] t(), t().ptr but not t.ptr
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=678 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 692] rules for assigning to complex types are too strict
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=692 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Version|0.177 |D1 AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 13:31:34 PST --- Marking this as D1 only as D2 will only use library complex types. I think this is a wontfix as D1 is frozen, but will leave the decision to Walter. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 693] 'this' can't be used as an alias parameter for a mixin
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=693 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #1 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 13:33:57 PST --- Bug present in 1.065 and 2.050 with different error messages. 1.065: test.d(14): Error: mixin printer_mix!(this) does not match template declaration printer_mix(alias T) 2.050: test.d(14): Error: expression this is not a valid template value argument -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 701] Inline naked asm uses incorrect offsets
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=701 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5277] Member functions that modify its own state wrongfully marked as strongly pure.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5277 Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #1 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2010-11-26 13:47:19 PST --- I think that this is a duplicate of bug# 5191. If not, it's certainly related. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 705] Mixins and auto
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=705 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 707] incorrect error lines for failed aliases
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=707 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #1 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 13:53:30 PST --- The first example seems to work properly now on 1.065 and 2.050, but not the other two. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 711] combining mixins and overriding causes inifite loops
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=711 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 712] incorrect scope of class level mixins if interfaces are involved
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=712 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 678] Compiler accepts, for a function T[] t(), t().ptr but not t.ptr
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=678
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc
--- Comment #6 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 13:55:18 PST ---
This situations will be partially cleaned up when functions/delegates calls
will require ().
The specs need to specify what's the behaviour of using the .ptr of a @property
delegate that returns an array (or that returns anything that has a ptr field):
void main() {
@property int[] delegate() bar1 = { return [1, 2]; };
struct Foo { int* ptr; }
@property Foo delegate() bar2 = { return Foo(); };
auto x1 = bar1.ptr;
auto x2 = bar2.ptr;
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 759] rdmd does not accept *.d or name.d as program argument
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=759 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 14:00:24 PST --- Tried the example (after fixing for D2) with: $ rdmd test.d . $ rdmd test.d . '*.d' $ ./test.d . $ ./test.d . '*.d' $ mkdir -p name.d $ rdmd test.d name.d $ ./test.d name.d All work as expected. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 767] compiler shall print dependencies and pragma(lib)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=767 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 768] A switch to print predefined version identifiers
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=768 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 769] Property not properly compiled - (error on valid code)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=769 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 14:05:54 PST --- Second version works with 2.050, first problem persists. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 780] The assignment of 'this' is allowed
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=780 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 783] Cannot use an array w/ const or variable index as new[] size argument.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=783 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 538] Can't return an expression tuple from a function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=538 Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||llu...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 14:13:03 PST --- Is the error message improved? It's really misleading... -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 790] arbitrary lookahead for nested functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=790 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #2 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 14:11:51 PST --- I personally think this should be just closed. Symbols defined inside a functions obey sequential visibility. The decision is left to Walter. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 796] Asserting a null object reference throws AssertError Failure internal\invariant.d(14) or Access Violation
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=796 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #6 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 14:13:26 PST --- Still present in 2.050. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4172] Improve varargs
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4172 --- Comment #6 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 14:15:36 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) TypeInfo has offTi property that returns OffsetTypeInfo[], which is exactly what you want - types and offsets of struct members. That information is (and always has been) missing. offTi is always null. Maybe Walter tried it and then thought it'd use too much memory. What problem do you have with struct layout? You can't sum address of struct and field offset to get address of field? Anyway, if reflection in D is awful, may be it's better to make it usable rather than burden the compiler with work that can be done by reflection but is not done yet? Good luck with that. And I don't see any additional burden. It's already burdened with packing the params on the stack. My proposal might actually make it simpler for both compiler and user. Why burden the user with highly ABI dependent struct or stack layouts? Is this assembler? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 692] rules for assigning to complex types are too strict
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=692 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc --- Comment #4 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 14:36:48 PST --- This is not the right place to discuss this, but I remember a discussion about removing the implementation of complex numbers (and move it into Phobos) and part of their syntax (ireal, ifloat, etc), but to keep complex literals in D2 (like a + 0.0fi). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5277] Member functions that modify its own state wrongfully marked as strongly pure.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5277 --- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com 2010-11-26 14:39:51 PST --- I would consider it the same issue. At least, Don's patch in the other report seems to fix it. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5277] Member functions that modify its own state wrongfully marked as strongly pure.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5277 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 14:42:08 PST --- Then let's close this one as dupe. *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5191 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5191] Combination of pure and nothrow result in a function that does nothing
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5191 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ibuc...@ubuntu.com --- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 14:42:08 PST --- *** Issue 5277 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 538] Can't return an expression tuple from a function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=538 nfx...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC||nfx...@gmail.com Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #8 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 14:58:06 PST --- There's no reason to close this as WONTFIX. It's an backward compatible enhancement requests, and some of these have been answered by Walter in the past. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5279] New: Function-static associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5279
Summary: Function-static associative arrays
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: bearophile_h...@eml.cc
--- Comment #0 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 14:58:57 PST ---
I'd like DMD to support the definition of static associative arrays, that
become initialized only once at module start:
void foo() {
static string[string] map1 = [bar : spam];
static const string[string] map2 = [bar : spam];
static immutable string[string] map3 = [bar : spam];
}
void main() {}
That is similar to a static this() initialization of those maps, but with
visibility limited to foo().
--
Just for reference this is how DMD 2.050 compiles various kinds of AAs
literals, in all cases but fifth_function() the AA seems created again at each
function call (I think there is already a bug report about the enum AAs, but I
don't remember its number, please add it below if you remember it):
string first_function(string k) {
immutable string[string] map1 = [bar : spam];
return map1[k];
}
string second_function(string k) {
const string[string] map2 = [bar : spam];
return map2[k];
}
string third_function(string k) {
enum string[string] map3 = [bar : spam];
return map3[k];
}
string fourth_function(string k) {
static enum string[string] map4 = [bar : spam];
return map4[k];
}
immutable string[string] map5;
static this() {
map5 = [bar : spam];
}
string fifth_function(string k) {
return map5[k];
}
void main() {}
Compiled with:
DMD 2.050, -O -release -inline
_D5test314first_functionFAyaZAyacomdat
L0: pushEAX
mov EAX,offset FLAT:_D11TypeInfo_Aa6__initZ
mov ECX,offset FLAT:_D16TypeInfo_HAyayAa6__initZ
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
push8
pushEAX
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[01Ch]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[018h]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[0Ch]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[08h]
push1
pushECX
callnear ptr __d_assocarrayliteralT
add ESP,018h
pushEAX
callnear ptr __aaGetRvalue
mov EDX,4[EAX]
mov EAX,[EAX]
add ESP,014h
pop ECX
ret 8
_D5test315second_functionFAyaZAya comdat
L0: pushEAX
mov EAX,offset FLAT:_D11TypeInfo_Aa6__initZ
mov ECX,offset FLAT:_D17TypeInfo_HAyaxAya6__initZ
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
push8
pushEAX
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[01Ch]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[018h]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[0Ch]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[08h]
push1
pushECX
callnear ptr __d_assocarrayliteralT
add ESP,018h
pushEAX
callnear ptr __aaGetRvalue
mov EDX,4[EAX]
mov EAX,[EAX]
add ESP,014h
pop ECX
ret 8
_D5test314third_functionFAyaZAyacomdat
L0: pushEAX
mov EAX,offset FLAT:_D11TypeInfo_Aa6__initZ
mov ECX,offset FLAT:_D16TypeInfo_HAyaAya6__initZ
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
push8
pushEAX
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[01Ch]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[018h]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[0Ch]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[08h]
push1
pushECX
callnear ptr __d_assocarrayliteralT
add ESP,018h
pushEAX
callnear ptr __aaGetRvalue
mov EDX,4[EAX]
mov EAX,[EAX]
add ESP,014h
pop ECX
ret 8
_D5test315fourth_functionFAyaZAya comdat
L0: pushEAX
mov EAX,offset FLAT:_D11TypeInfo_Aa6__initZ
mov ECX,offset FLAT:_D16TypeInfo_HAyaAya6__initZ
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
push8
pushEAX
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[01Ch]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[018h]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[0Ch]
pushdword ptr FLAT:_DATA[08h]
push1
pushECX
callnear ptr __d_assocarrayliteralT
add ESP,018h
pushEAX
callnear ptr __aaGetRvalue
mov EDX,4[EAX]
mov EAX,[EAX]
add ESP,014h
pop ECX
ret 8
_D5test314fifth_functionFAyaZAyacomdat
L0: pushEAX
mov EAX,offset FLAT:_D11TypeInfo_Aa6__initZ
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
pushdword ptr 0Ch[ESP]
push8
pushEAX
pushdword ptr _D5test34map5yHAyaAa
callnear ptr __aaGetRvalue
mov
[Issue 790] arbitrary lookahead for nested functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=790 nfx...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nfx...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 15:05:03 PST --- The D1 _and_ the D2 specs say about this issue: Future directions: This restriction may be removed.. Talk about one hand not knowing what the other hand is doing. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5279] Function-static associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5279 Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #1 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2010-11-26 15:36:02 PST --- I would expect that this problem would be solved together with however being able to use Objects with CTFE and dynamic memory in general is solved. Since, I believe that it's essentially the same problem that won't allow you to initialize a global variable which is a class type to anything other than null. CTFE can't handle the heap yet. Once it can, AAs should work. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5279] Function-static associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5279
--- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 15:44:29 PST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
I would expect that this problem would be solved together with however being
able to use Objects with CTFE and dynamic memory in general is solved. Since,
I
believe that it's essentially the same problem that won't allow you to
initialize a global variable which is a class type to anything other than
null.
CTFE can't handle the heap yet. Once it can, AAs should work.
In DMD 2.050 this code works, so this enhancement request asks for those
foo_map* to be visible inside foo() only:
string[string] foo_map1;
const string[string] foo_map2;
immutable string[string] foo_map3;
static this() {
foo_map1 = [bar : spam];
foo_map2 = [bar : spam];
foo_map3 = [bar : spam];
}
void foo() {
// here use foo_map1, foo_map2, foo_map3
}
void main() {}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5279] Function-static associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5279 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2010-11-26 15:49:02 PST --- So essentially, you want static local variables to have access to a static constructor like all of the other variables with global lifetime do. Given that that breaks the scoping rules, I'm not sure that it's exactly a good idea. Perhaps allowing for a static constructor which is a nested function? That seems a bit like overkill, but it could theoretically work. If CTFE were properly advanced though, I don't think that it would be an issue. You'd either assign the variable an AA literal, or you'd write a function which created one and returned it, and you'd initialize the variable with that. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5279] Function-static associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5279 nfx...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nfx...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-11-26 15:53:05 PST --- Wouldn't that lead exactly to the same race condition prone crap C++ is doing when it comes to initialization of static variables inside functions? Just say no. Immutable data (or de-facto immutable data only accessible through const) is another story, though. (In reply to comment #1) I would expect that this problem would be solved together with however being able to use Objects with CTFE and dynamic memory in general is solved. Since, I believe that it's essentially the same problem that won't allow you to initialize a global variable which is a class type to anything other than null. CTFE can't handle the heap yet. Once it can, AAs should work. It's not that easy. The AA has to be allocated in the heap (to deal with later write accesses to the AA). How can CTFE allocate heap memory at the program's runtime? Obviously this doesn't work. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5279] Function-static associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5279 --- Comment #5 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-26 16:37:20 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) by Jonathan M Davis: So essentially, you want static local variables to have access to a static constructor like all of the other variables with global lifetime do. Given that that breaks the scoping rules, I'm not sure that it's exactly a good idea. I don't fully understand what you say, but I think you have misunderstood me. Surely I have never asked to break scoping rules. -- (In reply to comment #4) nfxjfg: Wouldn't that lead exactly to the same race condition prone crap C++ is doing when it comes to initialization of static variables inside functions? I don't know. If are sure that happens then please close this enhancement request. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5279] Function-static associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5279
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2010-11-26 17:21:30
PST ---
@nfxjfg
It's going to have to be able to do it for objects eventually. Yes, it's a
thorny problem, but it _can_ be done. The fact that it's a thorny problem is
the reason why it hasn't been done _yet_, but it will be done eventually.
@Bearophile
What I gathered what you were saying is that you were looking for a way to have
a static constructor initialize static local variables. Doing that would break
scoping rules.
However, re-reading your initial comment, it looks like what you want to have
happen is for the compiler to effectively set up a static constructor within
the function automatically which is not visible to the programmer. The compiler
would simply be smart enough to know that
static string[string] map1 = [bar : spam];
translates to something like
static string[string] map1;
static this()
{
string[string] map1_temp;
map1_temp[bar] = spam;
map1 = map1_temp;
}
That's not an entirely bad idea, but it seems to me that since CTFE has to be
fixed to be able to handle this situation anyway, we might as well just fix
CTFE rather than have the compiler special case this situation.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 803] incorrect error message and location for repeated aliases
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=803 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||and...@metalanguage.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|bugzi...@digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1077] writef and friends won't read/write from/to redirected std handles
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1077 --- Comment #1 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2010-11-26 17:50:31 PST --- I'd work on this but don't have a Windows machine. Could someone else take this bug over? Also, is it reproducible on D2? Thanks. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 692] rules for assigning to complex types are too strict
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=692 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #5 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-11-26 22:17:30 PST --- I don't see any good reason for this strictness. There is a good reason. It was a deliberate decision. I do not know how the rules could be weakened, without major changes to the lookup rules. Originally, the test cases did compile. But the problem is, with the broken implicit conversion rules we've inherited from C, it interferes with function overloading in a horrible way. Consider: void foo(real x); Then you add void foo(creal x); And suddenly foo(7.0); doesn't compile any more. The implicit conversions real - creal were removed for this reason. It's the lesser of two evils. Now, I've been planning a proposal for changing the implicit conversion rules for numeric literals, and possibly that make this possible as well. But it's a big change, even for D2. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
