On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:11:21 -0400, Lionello Lunesu
l...@lunesu.remove.com wrote:
I'm in the middle of moving from one city to another so don't wait for
me. I have attached the D version of the code in the wikipedia article
(including the patch for transpositions.)
It's not straightforward
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:11:21 -0400, Lionello Lunesu
l...@lunesu.remove.com wrote:
I'm in the middle of moving from one city to another so don't wait for
me. I have attached the D version of the code in the wikipedia article
(including the patch for
On Mon, 10 May 2010 09:22:21 -0400, Ary Borenszweig a...@esperanto.org.ar
wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Several others have privately brought up this problem to Walter. He
does not want to change how the symbol lookup tables work, and there is
no way to iterate them.
I can't
Hello Steven,
Several others have privately brought up this problem to Walter. He
does not want to change how the symbol lookup tables work, and there
is no way to iterate them.
Is it fundamentally impossible to iterate or is the code just not there and/or
nasty to write?
--
... IXOYE
On Mon, 10 May 2010 11:41:08 -0400, BCS n...@anon.com wrote:
Hello Steven,
Several others have privately brought up this problem to Walter. He
does not want to change how the symbol lookup tables work, and there
is no way to iterate them.
Is it fundamentally impossible to iterate or is the
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
It may not be an issue, the spell checker is simply a nice hint, but
isn't essential to determine errors.
It's a good summary of the situation. I've felt that as long as the message took
under a second to generate, it was ok. Realistically, I don't see anyone using
That code is in the public domain, by the way.
DMD should require a copyright notice in each source file :)
L.
On 7-5-2010 12:01, Lionello Lunesu wrote:
On 7-5-2010 9:10, Brad Roberts wrote:
On Fri, 7 May 2010, Lionello Lunesu wrote:
On 6-5-2010 22:37, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2010-05-05 23:45:50 -0400, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com
said:
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It
Walter Bright wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
I recompiled dmd with the profiler (-gt switch) which confirmed it.
For those interested, try out changeset 470.
On my timing tests, the time spent is linear with the number of characters in
the identifier. It's still too slow, though.
On Wed, 05 May 2010 23:45:50 -0400, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core processor(CentOS 5.3
kernel 2.6.32.4), to get the actual error messages about the undefined
identifier.
Hello Walter,
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core processor(CentOS 5.3
kernel 2.6.32.4), to get the actual error messages about the
undefined identifier.
Definitely there's a problem.
The problem is the spell checker is O(n*n) on the
On 2010-05-05 23:45:50 -0400, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com said:
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core processor(CentOS 5.3
kernel 2.6.32.4), to get the actual error messages about the undefined
identifier.
Definitely there's a
Steven Schveighoffer, el 6 de mayo a las 07:17 me escribiste:
On Wed, 05 May 2010 23:45:50 -0400, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core
processor(CentOS 5.3 kernel 2.6.32.4), to get the
On Thu, 06 May 2010 17:07:12 -0400, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
That can't be it. The identifier shown by Alex is only 33 characters.
O(n^2) is not that slow, especially for smaller variables. There must
be other factors you're not
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 06 May 2010 17:07:12 -0400, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
That can't be it. The identifier shown by Alex is only 33
characters. O(n^2) is not that slow, especially for smaller
variables. There must be other
On 6-5-2010 22:37, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2010-05-05 23:45:50 -0400, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com
said:
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core processor(CentOS 5.3
kernel 2.6.32.4), to get the actual error messages about the
On Fri, 7 May 2010, Lionello Lunesu wrote:
On 6-5-2010 22:37, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2010-05-05 23:45:50 -0400, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com
said:
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core processor(CentOS 5.3
kernel
Walter Bright wrote:
I recompiled dmd with the profiler (-gt switch) which confirmed it.
For those interested, try out changeset 470.
Walter Bright, el 4 de mayo a las 10:52 me escribiste:
Robert Clipsham wrote:
Still a long way to go though, various (much!) smaller issues that
need fixing... If no one else gets to them I'll go on a debug
fixing spree at some point in a couple of months and see if we
can't get bug #4044
On 04/05/10 20:43, Walter Bright wrote:
Yes, do it!
http://dwarfstd.org/ShowIssue.php?issue=100504.1
Please feel free to comment on it/make corrections :)
On 05/05/10 20:36, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 04/05/10 20:43, Walter Bright wrote:
Yes, do it!
http://dwarfstd.org/ShowIssue.php?issue=100504.1
Please feel free to comment on it/make corrections :)
This has been assigned issue #100504.1.
We are not accepting extension proposals for DWARF
Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 05/05/10 20:36, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 04/05/10 20:43, Walter Bright wrote:
Yes, do it!
http://dwarfstd.org/ShowIssue.php?issue=100504.1
Please feel free to comment on it/make corrections :)
This has been assigned issue #100504.1.
We are not accepting
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core processor(CentOS 5.3
kernel 2.6.32.4), to get the actual error messages about the undefined
identifier.
Definitely there's a problem.
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core processor(CentOS 5.3
kernel 2.6.32.4), to get the actual error messages about the undefined
identifier.
Definitely there's a problem.
The problem is the spell checker is O(n*n) on the number of
Alex Makhotin wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Alex Makhotin wrote:
It takes ~40 seconds 50% load on the dual core processor(CentOS 5.3
kernel 2.6.32.4), to get the actual error messages about the
undefined identifier.
Definitely there's a problem.
The problem is the
This is to fix the unittest and dwarf screwups in the last release.
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.060.zip
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.045.zip
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:30:36AM -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
This is to fix the unittest and dwarf screwups in the last release.
Yay, it seems to have fixed the weird endless loop I got in the last one.
On 04/05/10 18:30, Walter Bright wrote:
This is to fix the unittest and dwarf screwups in the last release.
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.060.zip
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.045.zip
Robert Clipsham wrote:
Still a long way to go though, various (much!) smaller issues that need
fixing... If no one else gets to them I'll go on a debug fixing spree at
some point in a couple of months and see if we can't get bug #4044
(debugging tracker) closed :)
I agree that getting all
On 04/05/10 18:52, Walter Bright wrote:
I agree that getting all the gdb issues sorted out will be a nice win.
I fixed all the killer ones (for ELF systems at least), you can now set
breakpoints and get backtraces etc, the remaining issues are to do with
line numbers being a bit off under
Robert Clipsham wrote:
While you're reading, is there any chance you could take a look at my
post on the dmd-internals ML and give me some feedback? I noticed you
agreed with Brad in a bug report, but to what extent? When I get around
to fixing all those bugs I'd like to know where you stand
On 04/05/10 19:03, Walter Bright wrote:
Basically, I don't think the switches need to change, just:
-g: debugger can handle D data types and extensions
-gc: make it work with whatever the debugger can handle, i.e. for
debuggers that don't know about D
You'd be ok with, for example:
-g
Robert Clipsham wrote:
You'd be ok with, for example:
-g add symbolic debug info
-gcadd symbolic debug info, pretend to be C++
Instead of C then? Or some other language that debuggers support? I say
this as C++ supports more of D's features, so we'd be able to give
On 04/05/10 19:50, Walter Bright wrote:
That's the problem with D extensions; unless they get officially adopted
they conflict with future changes to the spec. We need to get them
officially adopted.
Too late for this, DWARF 4 has introduced conflicts with them already.
We could try and get
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 04/05/10 19:50, Walter Bright wrote:
That's the problem with D extensions; unless they get officially adopted
they conflict with future changes to the spec. We need to get them
officially adopted.
Too late for this, DWARF 4 has introduced
Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 04/05/10 19:50, Walter Bright wrote:
That's the problem with D extensions; unless they get officially adopted
they conflict with future changes to the spec. We need to get them
officially adopted.
Too late for this, DWARF 4 has introduced conflicts with them already.
On 04/05/10 20:43, Walter Bright wrote:
Yes, do it!
I have submitted a proposal, I'm currently awaiting confirmation that it
has been received. I'll let you know how/if it progresses and paste
links if I can so you can track it yourself :)
Yay that was fast :)
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.comwrote:
This is to fix the unittest and dwarf screwups in the last release.
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.060.zip
38 matches
Mail list logo
