[Issue 10562] Cannot initialize arrays by an element value when the elements are fixed-length arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10562 Maxim Fomin ma...@maxim-fomin.ru changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ma...@maxim-fomin.ru --- Comment #1 from Maxim Fomin ma...@maxim-fomin.ru 2013-07-07 00:10:45 PDT --- From the spec: If a slice operator appears as the lvalue of an assignment expression, and the type of the rvalue is the same as the element type of the lvalue, then the lvalue's array contents are set to the rvalue. Assuming that single value initialization is a semantic equivalent of slice expression, the code should work. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10560] Enum typed as int with value equal to 0 or 1 prefer bool over int overload
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10560 Maxim Fomin ma...@maxim-fomin.ru changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ma...@maxim-fomin.ru --- Comment #1 from Maxim Fomin ma...@maxim-fomin.ru 2013-07-07 00:21:26 PDT --- This is a separate issue. Boo should be Boo in the first place and int in the second. In referenced issue bool and long are overloaded, here are bool and int. If you pass 1 in such case int version should be called. Problem here is that int was converted to bool and passed to bool overload instead of int which is a bug. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7364] Better Eponymous Template syntax
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7364
monarchdo...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||monarchdo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #8 from monarchdo...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 02:47:02 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Current Eponymous Template syntax forces one to repeat a template name. It's
bad because:
* Templates often have long names like `FunctionTypeOf` (or longer) so it's
just long to write `alias ... FunctionTypeOf;`.
* If one will make a misprint in retyping a long template name he will be
punished.
* If a template is renamed (can happened with private templates) or a part of
template is moved to an internal template every using of a template name
should
be changed appropriately. If one will make a mistake in this renaming, see
previous case.
If, e.g. Alias This syntax will be added (with no more than one `alias this`
per template)
Just want to point out that technically, as long as you don't create any
conflicts (eg functions that overload), then you can have as many eponymous
entries as you wish.
template foo
{
void foo(){}
void foo(int i){}
}
things will be significantly better because lots of Phobos (a
real world library example) eponymous template aliases something. And now
these
templates look terrible. More than that, `this` is a keyword and will be
highlighted in most editors unlike current syntax.
Inspired by Aliasing of template results post in NG by Alex R�nne Petersen.
I have two problems with this.
1. The first is the the syntax `alias this` does not imply shadowing of the
rest of the members. EG:
template Foo
{
alias this = long;
alias T = short;
}
//Later:
Foo a;
Foo.T b; //Error: T not a property of long ? What???
In this case, I think `alias this` does a bad parallel with *what* alias this
actually does.
2. Ditto for functions:
template foo
{
void this(){}
void this(int i){}
}
//Template constructors?
//No! eponymous template!
Again, bad parralel between what this does in general case.
So if I placed my vote on something, it would rather it be on the template
keyword, or anything else actually. I'm not sold on using this.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10031] Link to old wiki on dlang.org
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10031 monarchdo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P2 |P1 CC||monarchdo...@gmail.com Severity|normal |major --- Comment #2 from monarchdo...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 03:28:32 PDT --- +1. This needs to get fixed. Linking people to out of date resources isn't really acceptable. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10564] New: Errors on the Template page of the language specification
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10564
Summary: Errors on the Template page of the language
specification
Product: D
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: websites
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: tommitiss...@hotmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Tommi tommitiss...@hotmail.com 2013-07-07 04:06:57 PDT ---
These are found on the page:
http://dlang.org/template.html
1) In the spec it says:
Even if template arguments are implicitly converted to the same template
parameter type, they still refer to different instances:
struct TFoo(int x) { }
static assert(is(TFoo!(3) == TFoo!(2 + 1))); // 3 and 2+1 are both 3 of type
int
static assert(!is(TFoo!(3) == TFoo!(3u))); // 3u and 3 are different types
...but at least according to DMD, TFoo!(3) and TFoo!(3u) refer to the same
type.
2) In the spec it says:
Template arguments not implicitly deduced can have default values:
void Foo(T, U=T*)(T t) { U p; ... }
int x;
Foo(x);// T is int, U is int*
...but the last line should be:
Foo(x);// T is int, U is int*
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10557] __traits(== __parameters) should accept function pointer/delegate type
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10557 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #2 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 05:57:46 PDT --- After bug 10548 fixed, this ER would become unnecessary. So I withdraw this. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10548] [REG 2.064a] argument has no identifier
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10548 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Comment #2 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 05:55:45 PDT --- Sorry, the above comment was my mistake. Finally I've concluded that the current git head behavior is *unnecessarily* restrictive. I reconsidered about it and convinced that fixing this *regression* won't introduce any dangerous semantics. I reopen this issue. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10565] New: Level-5 titles are missing in Language reference
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10565 Summary: Level-5 titles are missing in Language reference Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: websites AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: dmitry.o...@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 06:16:21 PDT --- Due to H5 macro not being defined in doc.ddoc. Pull: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/349#issuecomment-20570427 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10566] New: Implement Unicode Collation Algorithm (UCA)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10566 Summary: Implement Unicode Collation Algorithm (UCA) Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: Phobos AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: dmitry.o...@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 06:20:23 PDT --- This should become another piece of std.uni functionality. It is essential for applications such as databases and UI interfaces that try to produce natural (language and culture wise) sorting order, instead of some consistent but arbitrary. Relevant technical report: http://unicode.org/reports/tr10/ -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10548] [REG 2.064a] argument has no identifier
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10548 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull, rejects-valid --- Comment #3 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 06:20:52 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/2311 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10519] Stray-paren in doc-unittest code generates wrong document
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10519 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-07-07 08:23:55 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/9106a3877addceb893c005c423fafdcc7ffefdf1 fix Issue 10519 - Stray-paren in doc-unittest code generates wrong document https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/ae5ec6160fe58e6489419f9daa77bdc907ed1b80 Merge pull request #2287 from 9rnsr/fix10519 Issue 10519 - Stray-paren in doc-unittest code generates wrong document -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7656] ddoc misinterprets commented parentheses in an example
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7656 --- Comment #4 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-07-07 08:23:58 PDT --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/0a1cb852ef3fd1cb1cae6143029ed1cddfcf3806 fix Issue 7656 - ddoc misinterprets commented parentheses in an example -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7715] DDoc eats $1, $2, $3 etc. inside d_code section
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7715 --- Comment #7 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-07-07 08:24:04 PDT --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/b2a3ea72fd9f60cac38ba6008e139982649360ff fix Issue 7715 - DDoc eats $1, $2, $3 etc. inside d_code section -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7715] DDoc eats $1, $2, $3 etc. inside d_code section
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7715 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ddoc Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10519] Stray-paren in doc-unittest code generates wrong document
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10519 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7656] ddoc misinterprets commented parentheses in an example
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7656 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10560] Enum typed as int with value equal to 0 or 1 prefer bool over int overload
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10560 --- Comment #2 from yazan.dab...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 13:44:11 PDT --- I certainly agree. I just wanted to note the explanation on why an int 'literal' of 1 would match a bool overload in the first place. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10548] [REG 2.064a] argument has no identifier
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10548 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10548] [REG 2.064a] argument has no identifier
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10548 --- Comment #4 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-07-07 13:47:51 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/7f932696732c9f8237b039b72342e3080ddd8c11 Issue 10548 - argument has no identifier Don't strip default args and parameter names on alias declarations. Instead do it against template type arguments. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/0f36bb59d3f4be01b19510d7c625ed458f00b831 Merge pull request #2311 from 9rnsr/improveDefArgs [REG2.064a] Issue 10548 - argument has no identifier -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8435] BigInts don't work well in associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8435 --- Comment #1 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 18:11:30 PDT --- cf. #10118. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8435] BigInts don't work well in associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8435 --- Comment #2 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 18:12:15 PDT --- Gah, I meant bug #10118. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10118] BigInt as associative array key wrong behavior
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10118 --- Comment #1 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 18:11:20 PDT --- Seems to be a duplicate of #8435. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10118] BigInt as associative array key wrong behavior
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10118 --- Comment #2 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 18:12:43 PDT --- Bug #8435, that is. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10558] Assertion failure on struct.c:741
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10558 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |regression --- Comment #2 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 18:37:44 PDT --- This is a regression on 2.064 alpha (git head only). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10558] Assertion failure on struct.c:741
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10558 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice, pull Version|unspecified |D2 --- Comment #1 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2013-07-07 18:36:54 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/2314 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8435] BigInts don't work well in associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8435 --- Comment #3 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 20:44:34 PDT --- This bug is caused by two problems: 1) BigInt does not define toHash(), so two different instances of BigInt will always have a distinct hash, even if the values they represent are equal. 2) For some reason, typeid(BigInt).compare() will always return non-zero for two distinct instances of BigInt; this causes the AA code to think the two BigInts are not equal even if their hash is the same. I have the fix for (1), but still investigating (2); it may be a compiler bug, I'm not sure yet. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10561] Regression (2.064 HEAD): anon enum members no longer have enum base type
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10561 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10561] Regression (2.064 HEAD): anon enum members no longer have enum base type
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10561 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-07-07 21:00:58 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/ee39e099a9886c2fceccee2a4c3e47e114e4864f fix issue 10561 - anon enum members no longer have enum base type https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/fbb0ac5bed755cac79d17048fbfd4d7345b6bb17 Merge pull request #2309 from hpohl/10561 [REG2.064a] fix issue 10561 - anon enum members no longer have enum base type -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6169] [CTFE] pure functions cannot compute constants using functions not marked as pure
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6169 --- Comment #16 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-07-07 21:09:32 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/c2647ba31e7a60ccc354e67aad3a05ceaf7b755e Remain fix for issue 6169 Add ctfeResolveProperties() which avoids purity and safety check https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/d895e4e8463de991c7b3ea723803374d6f9bf36a Merge pull request #2290 from 9rnsr/fix6169 Remain fix for issue 6169 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8435] BigInts don't work well in associative arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8435 --- Comment #4 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 21:26:26 PDT --- The fix for (2) is blocked by issue #10567. :-( -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10567] New: Typeinfo.compare has unreasonable signature requirements on opCmp
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10567
Summary: Typeinfo.compare has unreasonable signature
requirements on opCmp
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
--- Comment #0 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 21:25:25 PDT ---
CODE:
snip---
import std.stdio;
struct S {
int[] data;
int opCmp(const S s) const {
return (data s.data) ? -1 : (data == s.data) ? 0 : 1;
}
}
void main() {
auto s = S([1,2,3]);
auto t = S([1,2,3]);
writeln(s==t);
writeln(typeid(s).compare(s, t)); // prints 16
}
snip---
Here, we defined opCmp to compare the array wrapped in S, and == correctly
calls the custom opCmp to return true.
However, typeid(S) fails to call the custom opCmp; it appears to fall back to
the default implementation of opCmp, which does a bitwise compare of S. This is
a bug, because if the signature of opCmp is changed to:
int opCmp(ref const S s) const { ... }
then typeid(S) correctly calls the custom opCmp instead.
However, requiring ref in the argument is unnecessarily restrictive. If ==
works correctly without requiring a ref const argument, then why should
typeid(S).compare require a ref const argument?
This bug is blocking issue #8435 and issue #10118.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10567] Typeinfo.compare has unreasonable signature requirements on opCmp
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10567 --- Comment #2 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 21:34:09 PDT --- Gah, I meant issue #10118. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 10567] Typeinfo.compare has unreasonable signature requirements on opCmp
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10567 --- Comment #1 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-07-07 21:31:24 PDT --- Furthermore, if opCmp is a template function, it is never picked up in the typeinfo. This makes it impossible to make typeinfo.compare behave correctly when you need to overload opCmp on templated argument types, because an IFTI bug makes it impossible to define both a template and non-template opCmp simultaneously. Why the big deal with typeinfo.compare? If == works, isn't that good enough? It's not good enough because the AA implementation uses typeinfo.compare for key comparisons. Thus you have the situation where two AA keys compare equal on ==, and toHash is correctly defined so that the keys have equal hash values, but aa[key] does not work because typeinfo.compare uses the wrong key comparison function. This is one of the underlying issues in issue #8435 and issue #10567. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
