[Issue 15464] Template parameter-dependent attributes

[via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15464

--- Comment #8 from Andrei Alexandrescu  ---
Ping?

--

[Issue 14804] Comparing two Nullables does not check if either is null

[via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14804

--- Comment #3 from b2.t...@gmx.com ---
(In reply to monkeyworks12 from comment #2)
> but let's not close this one for opEquals.

Without great convictionI've opened the PR, but let's the official maintainers
take the decision ;)

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3887

--

[Issue 15481] GC profiler thinks reducing array.length triggers reallocation

[via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15481

ag0ae...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ag0ae...@gmail.com
Summary|Reducing array.length   |GC profiler thinks reducing
   |triggers reallocation   |array.length triggers
   ||reallocation

--- Comment #1 from ag0ae...@gmail.com ---
This is a bug in the GC profiler. The array is not relocated. You can check by
comparing the pointers:


void main()
{
int[] arr;
arr.length = 7;
int* p = arr.ptr;
arr.length = 6;
assert(arr.ptr == p); /* passes */
}


I'm changing the title of this issue accordingly.

--

[Issue 15481] GC profiler thinks reducing array.length triggers reallocation

[via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15481

--- Comment #2 from Valentin Milea  ---
Maybe the reallocation function is called and returns the same buffer. But why
call it in the first place, if reducing array length is supposed to be
_equivalent_ to slicing?

--