There are still 7 reported regressions unfinished according to
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?y_axis_field=bug_severityquery_format=report-tableproduct=Dbug_status=NEWbug_status=ASSIGNEDbug_status=REOPENEDbug_severity=regression
and if 8774 is not fixed then DMD 2.061 will be as
On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 01:10 -0800, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[…]
It sounds like no one even has a clue which project the bug is in. It's
clearly a major problem, but unless someone can figure out what's wrong, it's
obviously not going to be fixed.
Someone analysed this for a couple of days
Am 22.12.2012 11:31, schrieb Russel Winder:
On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 01:10 -0800, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[âŠ]
It sounds like no one even has a clue which project the bug is in. It's
clearly a major problem, but unless someone can figure out what's wrong, it's
obviously not going to be fixed.
On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 11:36 +0100, dennis luehring wrote:
[…]
so first you need to update your bug-report - you stated that ldc is
also not working - thats a bug in you bug report :)
It turns out to be more complicated than that. There isn't a bug in the
bug report: LDC does work where DMD
Am 22.12.2012 13:15, schrieb Russel Winder:
After New Year/Hogmanay, or earlier if possible, I will reinvestigate
all the factors and update the issue appropriately.
sound for me like an bug in the dmd code generation - ldc frontend code
should be nearly the same (or better: i don't think
On Saturday, 22 December 2012 at 12:15:38 UTC, Russel Winder
wrote:
Interesting (or not)
side observation: LDC generally creates faster executables than
DMD,
except in one or two cases that I have.
If you ever have time to do some quick profiling, could you
please try to figure out why the
On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 17:41 +0100, David Nadlinger wrote:
[…]
If you ever have time to do some quick profiling, could you
please try to figure out why the LDC-generated executable is
slower – or if the code you are working on is open source, put
some instructions together on how to run the
On Friday, 21 December 2012 at 22:12:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
We plan to start building a new release on Sunday evening. To
do so (pursuant to the embryonic process we're putting in
place), at that time we'll create a new branch called staging
for each of dmd, druntime, and phobos.
On 12/22/12 1:39 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
On Friday, 21 December 2012 at 22:12:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
We plan to start building a new release on Sunday evening. To do so
(pursuant to the embryonic process we're putting in place), at that
time we'll create a new branch called
On 22-12-2012 06:11, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, December 21, 2012 17:12:47 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
We plan to start building a new release on Sunday evening. To do so
(pursuant to the embryonic process we're putting in place), at that time
we'll create a new branch called staging for
On 21/12/2012 19:02, Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
Dear D community,
I've been urged by many others to post about Amber here. It is a
programming language being derived from D1, with a compiler written
using D1 and Tango, with LLVM and C backends. The quality of code and
documention is alpha (or
On 12/22/2012 10:39 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
On Friday, 21 December 2012 at 22:12:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
We plan to start building a new release on Sunday evening. To do so
(pursuant to the embryonic process we're putting
in place), at that time we'll create a new branch called
On Saturday, 22 December 2012 at 21:48:51 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote:
I strongly recommend requiring that all bugs be first fixed in
the development branch and then being pushed backwards
through the version history. Quite a few projects follow this
pattern based on the requirement that no fix
On 12/22/2012 3:44 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
On Saturday, 22 December 2012 at 21:48:51 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote:
I strongly recommend requiring that all bugs be first fixed in the
development branch and then being pushed backwards
through the version history. Quite a few projects follow
On Saturday, December 22, 2012 17:36:11 Brad Roberts wrote:
On 12/22/2012 3:44 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
What is nice about making a pull request against staging is that the
reviewer knows that the fix can be applied that far (not that comments
wouldn't do the same).
I don't believe
On 12/22/2012 5:43 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Saturday, December 22, 2012 17:36:11 Brad Roberts wrote:
On 12/22/2012 3:44 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
What is nice about making a pull request against staging is that the
reviewer knows that the fix can be applied that far (not that comments
16 matches
Mail list logo
