[Issue 2079] Phobos unit tests fail assertion on std/std/string.d

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2079 --- Comment #5 from Dlang Bot --- dlang/dub pull request #2106 "merge stable" was merged into master: - d43fbae49752d309ba822ecfbe80322496c13130 by Ömer Faruk IRMAK: Allow adding dflags on dependencies when using SDL format Fixes #2079

[Issue 2079] Phobos unit tests fail assertion on std/std/string.d

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2079 --- Comment #4 from Dlang Bot --- dlang/dub pull request #2081 "Allow adding dflags on dependencies when using SDL format" was merged into stable: - cfd4fd801468a46cd599dda476c19bbd9f093237 by Ömer Faruk IRMAK: Allow adding dflags on dependencies

When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail?

When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail? (Ubuntu 16.04 - DMD64 D Compiler v2.071.0) For example, when following these steps I get a failed unit test: $ cd /usr/include/dmd/phobos/std/ $ rdmd -I/usr/include/dmd/phobos/std -I/usr/include/dmd/phobos/core

[Issue 16204] When using the -profile flag phobos unit tests fail

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16204 greenify changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, 3 September 2016 at 17:16:24 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Saturday, September 03, 2016 16:56:08 ZombineDev via Digitalmars-d wrote: You can just enable the unittests for a single instance that you know for sure that it will be used. For example: 1)

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, September 03, 2016 16:56:08 ZombineDev via Digitalmars-d wrote: > You can just enable the unittests for a single instance that you > know for sure that it will be used. For example: > 1) > https://github.com/dlang/phobos/blob/v2.071.2-b3/std/experimental/ndslice/sl > ice.d#L808 > > 2)

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, 3 September 2016 at 15:58:51 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Saturday, September 03, 2016 07:48:14 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: > In any case, for now, I never put non-generic unit tests in > templates, and I reject PRs that have them. Sure, having to > copy-paste your

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, 3 September 2016 at 15:54:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Saturday, September 03, 2016 15:06:33 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d wrote: On 9/3/16 5:36 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: > This document: https://wiki.dlang.org/Contributing_to_Phobos > > States: "Avoid

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, September 03, 2016 07:48:14 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > In any case, for now, I never put non-generic unit tests in templates, > > and I reject PRs that have them. Sure, having to copy-paste your > > examples sucks, but it doesn't affect the code of everyone who uses > >

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, September 03, 2016 15:06:33 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 9/3/16 5:36 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > This document: https://wiki.dlang.org/Contributing_to_Phobos > > > > States: "Avoid unittest in templates (it will generate a new unittest > > for each

Re: phobos unit tests

On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 05:46:23AM -0700, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Saturday, September 03, 2016 13:36:06 Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > This document: https://wiki.dlang.org/Contributing_to_Phobos > > > > States: "Avoid unittest in templates (it will generate a new > >

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, 3 September 2016 at 12:46:23 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: so long as the language works this way. That's why I created DIP 82: http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP82 Unfortunately, it didn't generate much discussion and hasn't been implemented yet (which is often the case with DIPs), and

Re: phobos unit tests

On 9/3/16 5:36 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: This document: https://wiki.dlang.org/Contributing_to_Phobos States: "Avoid unittest in templates (it will generate a new unittest for each instance) - put your tests outside" Actually that's a good thing, sometimes you do want to run a

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, September 03, 2016 13:36:06 Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: > This document: https://wiki.dlang.org/Contributing_to_Phobos > > States: "Avoid unittest in templates (it will generate a new unittest > for each instance) - put your tests outside" > > Sounds reasonable, but then I realised

Re: phobos unit tests

On Saturday, 3 September 2016 at 03:36:06 UTC, Manu wrote: This document: https://wiki.dlang.org/Contributing_to_Phobos States: "Avoid unittest in templates (it will generate a new unittest for each instance) - put your tests outside" Sounds reasonable, but then I realised that most of my

phobos unit tests

This document: https://wiki.dlang.org/Contributing_to_Phobos States: "Avoid unittest in templates (it will generate a new unittest for each instance) - put your tests outside" Sounds reasonable, but then I realised that most of my unit tests are documenting unittests... this recommendation is in

Re: When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail?

On 6/25/2016 12:52 AM, Gary Willoughby wrote: Done. Good!

Re: When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail?

On Friday, 24 June 2016 at 22:24:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Please post bug reports to bugzilla. They'll get lost in the n.g. Done. https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16204

[Issue 16204] New: When using the -profile flag phobos unit tests fail

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16204 Issue ID: 16204 Summary: When using the -profile flag phobos unit tests fail Product: D Version: D2 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal

Re: When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail?

On 6/24/2016 10:50 AM, Gary Willoughby wrote: On Friday, 24 June 2016 at 17:36:49 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote: When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail? (Ubuntu 16.04 - DMD64 D Compiler v2.071.0) For example, when following these steps I get a failed unit

Re: When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail?

On Friday, 24 June 2016 at 17:36:49 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote: When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail? (Ubuntu 16.04 - DMD64 D Compiler v2.071.0) For example, when following these steps I get a failed unit test: $ cd /usr/include/dmd/phobos/std

When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail?

When using the -profile flag is it known behaviour that phobos unit tests fail? (Ubuntu 16.04 - DMD64 D Compiler v2.071.0) For example, when following these steps I get a failed unit test: $ cd /usr/include/dmd/phobos/std/ $ rdmd -I/usr/include/dmd/phobos/std -I/usr/include/dmd/phobos/core

[Issue 2079] Phobos unit tests fail assertion on std/std/string.d

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2079 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Component|Phobos |DMD

[Issue 2079] Phobos unit tests fail assertion on std/std/string.d

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2079 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|unspecified |D2 --

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12708 On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 16:07:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/4/14, 1:44 AM, Atila Neves wrote: On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 22:46:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/3/14, 2:42 PM, Atila Neves wrote: gdc gave _very_ different results.

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 17:01:23 UTC, safety0ff wrote: On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 22:46:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/3/14, 2:42 PM, Atila Neves wrote: gdc gave _very_ different results. I had to use different modules because at some point tests started failing, but with gdc the

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 12:26:13 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote: On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 12:24:59 UTC, Atila Neves wrote: Out of curiosity are you on Windows? No, Arch Linux 64-bit. I also just noticed a glaring threading bug in my code as well that somehow's never turned up. This is not

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

Going to take a wild guess, but as core.atomic.casImpl will never be inlined anywhere with DMD, due to it's inline assembly, you have the cost of building and destroying a stack frame, the cost of passing the args in, moving them into registers, saving potentially trashed registers, etc. every

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On 5 May 2014 19:07, Orvid King via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote: Going to take a wild guess, but as core.atomic.casImpl will never be inlined anywhere with DMD, due to it's inline assembly, you have the cost of building and destroying a stack frame, the cost of passing the

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 17:56:11 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 12:26:13 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote: On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 12:24:59 UTC, Atila Neves wrote: Out of curiosity are you on Windows? No, Arch Linux 64-bit. I also just noticed a glaring threading bug in my

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Sat, 2014-05-03 at 19:37 +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d wrote: […] I'm using parallel and taskPool from std.parallelism. I was under the impression it gave me a ready-to-use pool with as many threads as I have cores. There is a default, related to the number of cores the OS thinks

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 22:46:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/3/14, 2:42 PM, Atila Neves wrote: gdc gave _very_ different results. I had to use different modules because at some point tests started failing, but with gdc the threaded version runs ~3x faster. On my own unit-threaded

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

Like I mentioned afterwards, I tried a different number of threads. On my machine, at least, std.parallelism.totalCPUs returns 8, the number of virtual cores. As it should. Atila On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 07:49:51 UTC, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: On Sat, 2014-05-03 at 19:37 +,

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Sun, 2014-05-04 at 08:47 +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d wrote: Like I mentioned afterwards, I tried a different number of threads. On my machine, at least, std.parallelism.totalCPUs returns 8, the number of virtual cores. As it should. If you can create a small example of the

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On 5/4/14, 3:06 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: On Sun, 2014-05-04 at 08:47 +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d wrote: Like I mentioned afterwards, I tried a different number of threads. On my machine, at least, std.parallelism.totalCPUs returns 8, the number of virtual cores. As it

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On 5/4/14, 1:44 AM, Atila Neves wrote: On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 22:46:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/3/14, 2:42 PM, Atila Neves wrote: gdc gave _very_ different results. I had to use different modules because at some point tests started failing, but with gdc the threaded version

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On 04/05/14 09:49, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: (*) Physical cores are not necessarily the number reported by the OS due to core hyperthreads. Quad core no hyperthreads, and dual core, two hyperthreads per core, both get reported as four processor systems. However if you benchmark them

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 22:46:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/3/14, 2:42 PM, Atila Neves wrote: gdc gave _very_ different results. I had to use different modules because at some point tests started failing, but with gdc the threaded version runs ~3x faster. On my own unit-threaded

Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

So I tried using unit-threaded to run Phobos unit tests again and had problems (which I'll look into later) with its compile-time reflection. Then I realised I was an idiot since I don't need to reflect on anything: all Phobos tests are in unittest blocks so all I need to do is include them

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

using unit-threaded to run Phobos unit tests again and had problems (which I'll look into later) with its compile-time reflection. Then I realised I was an idiot since I don't need to reflect on anything: all Phobos tests are in unittest blocks so all I need to do is include them in the build

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

Out of curiosity are you on Windows? No, Arch Linux 64-bit. I also just noticed a glaring threading bug in my code as well that somehow's never turned up. This is not a good day. Atila

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 11:54:55 UTC, Atila Neves wrote: So I tried using unit-threaded to run Phobos unit tests again and had problems (which I'll look into later) with its compile-time reflection. Then I realised I was an idiot since I don't need to reflect on anything: all Phobos tests

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 12:24:59 UTC, Atila Neves wrote: Out of curiosity are you on Windows? No, Arch Linux 64-bit. I also just noticed a glaring threading bug in my code as well that somehow's never turned up. This is not a good day. Atila I'm surprised. Threads should be cheap on

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

Ok, so I went and added __traits(getUnitTests) to unit-threaded. That way each unittest block is its own test case. I registered these modules in std to run: array, ascii, base64, bigint, bitmanip, concurrency, container, cstream. On the good news front, they all passed even though they

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

I can reproduce the slower-with-threads issue without using my library. I've included the source file below and would like to know if other people see the same thing. The Phobos modules are all called ustd because I couldn't/didn't know how to get this to work otherwise. So I copied the

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On 5/3/14, 4:54 AM, Atila Neves wrote: So I tried using unit-threaded to run Phobos unit tests [snip] Thanks. Are you using thread pooling (a limited number of threads e.g. 1.5 * cores running all unittests)? -- Andrei

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On 5/3/2014 5:26 AM, Rikki Cattermole wrote: Something funky is definitely going on I bet. No doubt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZcbDESaxhY

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On 5/3/2014 10:22 AM, Atila Neves wrote: I can reproduce the slower-with-threads issue without using my library. I've included the source file below and would like to know if other people see the same thing. I haven't investigated this, but my suspicions are: 1. thread creation/destruction is

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 18:26:37 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 5/3/2014 10:22 AM, Atila Neves wrote: I can reproduce the slower-with-threads issue without using my library. I've included the source file below and would like to know if other people see the same thing. I haven't

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On Saturday, 3 May 2014 at 18:16:52 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/3/14, 4:54 AM, Atila Neves wrote: So I tried using unit-threaded to run Phobos unit tests [snip] Thanks. Are you using thread pooling (a limited number of threads e.g. 1.5 * cores running all unittests)? -- Andrei I'm

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

03-May-2014 21:22, Atila Neves пишет: I can reproduce the slower-with-threads issue without using my library. I've included the source file below and would like to know if other people see the same thing. The Phobos modules are all called ustd because I couldn't/didn't know how to get this to

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

if(single) { foreach(test; tests) { test(); } } else { foreach(test; tests.parallel) { Try different batch size: test.parallel(1), test.parallel(2) etc. So as to not have thread creation be disproportionately represented, I repeated the module list

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

gdc gave _very_ different results. I had to use different modules because at some point tests started failing, but with gdc the threaded version runs ~3x faster. On my own unit-threaded benchmarks, running the UTs for Cerealed over and over again was only slightly slower with threads than

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

Same thing with unit_threaded on Phobos, 3x faster even without repeating the modules (0.1s vs 0.3s). Since the example is shorter than the other one, I'll post it here in case anyone else wants to try: import unit_threaded.runner; int main(string[] args) { return args.runTests!(

Re: Running Phobos unit tests in threads: I have data

On 5/3/14, 2:42 PM, Atila Neves wrote: gdc gave _very_ different results. I had to use different modules because at some point tests started failing, but with gdc the threaded version runs ~3x faster. On my own unit-threaded benchmarks, running the UTs for Cerealed over and over again was only

Phobos unit tests, unreadable code

I'm merging the orange (std.serialization) unit tests with the test of Phobos. I hit a problem. I'm getting a warning about unreadable code but it's clear the code is reachable in some cases because there's a static-if involved. The unit tests won't run if there's a warning. How can we solve

Re: Phobos unit tests, unreadable code

On Wednesday, 12 June 2013 at 08:49:36 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I'm merging the orange (std.serialization) unit tests with the test of Phobos. I hit a problem. I'm getting a warning about unreadable code but it's clear the code is reachable in some cases because there's a static-if involved.

Re: Phobos unit tests, unreadable code

On 2013-06-12 10:55, monarch_dodra wrote: Do you have a link to the actual problem? This, for example: https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/orange/blob/master/orange/serialization/Serializer.d#L1217 I could probably add an else. -- /Jacob Carlborg