Re: Possible dmd 2.078 regression ?
On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 18:51:31 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 18:50:10 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 17:58:30 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 14:13:22 UTC, Basile B. wrote: I have a simple program that only compiles if the dependency is not pre-compiled as a static library. It worked fine before. I guess a mangle problem ? Yes and quite old...apparently it's more a 2.074.x regression. i'm digging right now. digger: Commit 1e7b526b40852e9b85df3684430e371034cdf7ec (1/1) is untestable. digger: There are only untestable commits left to bisect. digger: The first bad commit could be any of: digger: 1e7b526b40852e9b85df3684430e371034cdf7ec digger: 6fecaa8232a427fb3ca29c5a5245e08fc43b71b1 digger: f0410bea1ad2b130884964d603b34e729b3e4f69 object.Exception@bisect.d(186): We cannot bisect more! please file a bug on d.puremagic.com/issues/
Re: Possible dmd 2.078 regression ?
On Friday, 26 January 2018 at 22:15:15 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Friday, 26 January 2018 at 21:52:30 UTC, timotheecour wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 18:51:31 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 18:50:10 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 17:58:30 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 14:13:22 UTC, Basile B. wrote: I have a simple program that only compiles if the dependency is not pre-compiled as a static library. It worked fine before. I guess a mangle problem ? Yes and quite old...apparently it's more a 2.074.x regression. i'm digging right now. digger: Commit 1e7b526b40852e9b85df3684430e371034cdf7ec (1/1) is untestable. digger: There are only untestable commits left to bisect. digger: The first bad commit could be any of: digger: 1e7b526b40852e9b85df3684430e371034cdf7ec digger: 6fecaa8232a427fb3ca29c5a5245e08fc43b71b1 digger: f0410bea1ad2b130884964d603b34e729b3e4f69 object.Exception@bisect.d(186): We cannot bisect more! please file a bug on d.puremagic.com/issues/ Yeah i did. https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18234 I saw a related (but not similar) thing yesterday. the guy has to pass a dummy.d file for linking to succeed. Ah it was you actually: https://forum.dlang.org/thread/mailman.2616.1516919399.9493.digitalmars-d-b...@puremagic.com
Re: Possible dmd 2.078 regression ?
On Friday, 26 January 2018 at 21:52:30 UTC, timotheecour wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 18:51:31 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 18:50:10 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 17:58:30 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 14:13:22 UTC, Basile B. wrote: I have a simple program that only compiles if the dependency is not pre-compiled as a static library. It worked fine before. I guess a mangle problem ? Yes and quite old...apparently it's more a 2.074.x regression. i'm digging right now. digger: Commit 1e7b526b40852e9b85df3684430e371034cdf7ec (1/1) is untestable. digger: There are only untestable commits left to bisect. digger: The first bad commit could be any of: digger: 1e7b526b40852e9b85df3684430e371034cdf7ec digger: 6fecaa8232a427fb3ca29c5a5245e08fc43b71b1 digger: f0410bea1ad2b130884964d603b34e729b3e4f69 object.Exception@bisect.d(186): We cannot bisect more! please file a bug on d.puremagic.com/issues/ Yeah i did. https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18234 I saw a related (but not similar) thing yesterday. the guy has to pass a dummy.d file for linking to succeed.
Re: Possible dmd 2.078 regression ?
On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 18:50:10 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 17:58:30 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 14:13:22 UTC, Basile B. wrote: I have a simple program that only compiles if the dependency is not pre-compiled as a static library. It worked fine before. I guess a mangle problem ? Yes and quite old...apparently it's more a 2.074.x regression. i'm digging right now. digger: Commit 1e7b526b40852e9b85df3684430e371034cdf7ec (1/1) is untestable. digger: There are only untestable commits left to bisect. digger: The first bad commit could be any of: digger: 1e7b526b40852e9b85df3684430e371034cdf7ec digger: 6fecaa8232a427fb3ca29c5a5245e08fc43b71b1 digger: f0410bea1ad2b130884964d603b34e729b3e4f69 object.Exception@bisect.d(186): We cannot bisect more!
Re: Possible dmd 2.078 regression ?
On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 17:58:30 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 14:13:22 UTC, Basile B. wrote: I have a simple program that only compiles if the dependency is not pre-compiled as a static library. It worked fine before. I guess a mangle problem ? Yes and quite old...apparently it's more a 2.074.x regression. i'm digging right now.
Re: Possible dmd 2.078 regression ?
On Friday, 12 January 2018 at 14:13:22 UTC, Basile B. wrote: I have a simple program that only compiles if the dependency is not pre-compiled as a static library. It worked fine before. Please test this --- if [ ! -d "iz" ]; then git clone https://www.github.com/BBasile/iz.git fi cd iz/scripts sh compile.sh cd ../ #fails to link dmd samples/dictionnary_suffixarray.d lib/iz.a -Iimport > ddemangle #on the other hand, this works... dub samples/dictionnary_suffixarray.d <<< "q" #or even this... dmd samples/dictionnary_suffixarray.d import/iz/strings.d import/iz/memory.d -Iimport --- and tell me what do you think: regression or not ? I guess a mangle problem ?
Possible dmd 2.078 regression ?
I have a simple program that only compiles if the dependency is not pre-compiled as a static library. It worked fine before. Please test this --- if [ ! -d "iz" ]; then git clone https://www.github.com/BBasile/iz.git fi cd iz/scripts sh compile.sh cd ../ #fails to link dmd samples/dictionnary_suffixarray.d lib/iz.a -Iimport > ddemangle #on the other hand, this works... dub samples/dictionnary_suffixarray.d <<< "q" #or even this... dmd samples/dictionnary_suffixarray.d import/iz/strings.d import/iz/memory.d -Iimport --- and tell me what do you think: regression or not ?
