Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
Am Tue, 20 Oct 2015 19:26:13 +0200 schrieb Martin Nowak : > On 10/17/2015 09:05 PM, Marco Leise wrote: > > Oh wait, false alert. That was a relic from older days. My > > build script placed a dummy dmd.conf there. > > > > I do seem to get problems with ldc2-0.16.0: > > Are you using something befor 0.16.0-beta2, b/c I thought the problem > was resolved. > https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/5025#issuecomment-142143727 Indeed I should have checked that. I'm using 0.16.0_alpha4. Alright then. Everything works as designed now. :) -- Marco
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On 10/17/2015 09:05 PM, Marco Leise wrote: > Oh wait, false alert. That was a relic from older days. My > build script placed a dummy dmd.conf there. > > I do seem to get problems with ldc2-0.16.0: Are you using something befor 0.16.0-beta2, b/c I thought the problem was resolved. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/5025#issuecomment-142143727
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
Oh wait, false alert. That was a relic from older days. My build script placed a dummy dmd.conf there. I do seem to get problems with ldc2-0.16.0: make -C druntime -f posix.mak MODEL=32 ../dmd/src/dmd -conf= -c -o- -Isrc -Iimport -Hfimport/core/sync/barrier.di src/core/sync/barrier.d core.exception.AssertError@expression.d(4369): Assertion failure That is this line of code: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/blob/v2.069.0-b2/src/expression.d#L4369 Stack trace (with file + line numbers now, hey!): #0 StringExp::compare(RootObject*) (this=0xb66e30, obj=0xb65c80) at expression.d:4341 #1 0x004fb6ed in StringExp::equals(RootObject*) (this=0xb66e30, o=0xb65c80) at expression.d:4175 #2 0x004c4fe9 in match(RootObject*, RootObject*) (o1=0xb66e30, o2=0xb65c80) at dtemplate.d:246 #3 0x004c51c6 in arrayObjectMatch(Array*, Array*) (oa1=0x764aca98, oa2=0x764ac898) at dtemplate.d:290 #4 0x004cddd7 in TemplateInstance::compare(RootObject*) (this=0x764aca00, o=0x764ac800) at dtemplate.d:6232 #5 0x004cdaf8 in TemplateDeclaration::findExistingInstance(TemplateInstance*, Array*) (this=0x764ac600, tithis=0x764aca00, fargs=0x0) at dtemplate.d:2039 #6 0x004d2f24 in TemplateInstance::semantic(Scope*, Array*) (this=0x764aca00, sc=0x765dfc00, fargs=0x0) at dtemplate.d:5583 #7 0x00406877 in TemplateInstance::semantic(Scope*) (this=0x764aca00, sc=0x765dfc00) at dtemplate.d:5967 #8 0x0057a03a in TypeInstance::resolve(Loc, Scope*, Expression**, Type**, Dsymbol**, bool) (this=0x764ae100, loc=..., sc=0x765dfc00, pe=0x7fffcec0, pt=0x7fffcec8, ps=0x7fffceb8, intypeid=false) at mtype.d:7412 #9 0x0057a327 in TypeInstance::toDsymbol(Scope*) (this=0x764ae100, sc=0x765dfc00) at mtype.d:7459 #10 0x0043c5d6 in AliasDeclaration::semantic(Scope*) (this=0x764ae200, sc=0x765dfc00) at .:598 #11 0x004897f9 in Module::semantic() (this=0x76378400) at dmodule.d:976 #12 0x00488e0f in Import::semantic(Scope*) (this=0x76a82800, sc=0x76aa9c00) at dimport.d:258 #13 0x0042759a in AttribDeclaration::semantic(Scope*) (this=0x76a82900, sc=0x76aa9600) at attrib.d:168 #14 0x004897f9 in Module::semantic() (this=0x76a7fe00) at dmodule.d:976 #15 0x00488e0f in Import::semantic(Scope*) (this=0x77eca100, sc=0x77ed2200) at dimport.d:258 #16 0x0042759a in AttribDeclaration::semantic(Scope*) (this=0x77eca200, sc=0x77ecee00) at attrib.d:168 #17 0x004897f9 in Module::semantic() (this=0x77ec9000) at dmodule.d:976 #18 0x00567de5 in tryMain(unsigned long, char const**) (argc=8, argv=0x7fffe978) at mars.d:1485 #19 0x0056a567 in D main () at mars.d:1695 `sz` is 0, `string` and `len` seem to be ok. -- Marco
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 12:14:09 UTC, ponce wrote: On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 13:53:17 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Second beta for the 2.069.0 release. http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org -Martin Apart from https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15207, I'm seeing a huge +170% speed-up in 32-bit mode for optimized builds vs 2.068, something that is well appreciated :) 64-bit performance is mostly the same. What changed in the backend? When I wrote the section on backend improvements for the changelog, I wasn't aware how much faster the 32 bit code was. Would you be willing to run any benchmarks so I can add in actual numbers to that section.
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 09:24:42 UTC, extrawurst wrote: On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 08:13:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 12:14:09 UTC, ponce wrote: What changed in the backend? http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html#backend-improvements Is that limited to "-release" builds ? No, they're limited to -O builds.
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
Am Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:52:57 +0200 schrieb Martin Nowak : > Second beta for the 2.069.0 release. > > http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta > http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html > > Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org > > -Martin When I use a specific host compiler, it still picks up the dmd.conf provided in the package and doesn't find object.d. Should I manually delete dmd.conf before building? -- Marco
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 08:13:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 12:14:09 UTC, ponce wrote: What changed in the backend? http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html#backend-improvements Is that limited to "-release" builds ?
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 12:14:09 UTC, ponce wrote: What changed in the backend? http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html#backend-improvements
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 13:53:17 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Second beta for the 2.069.0 release. http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org -Martin Apart from https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15207, I'm seeing a huge +170% speed-up in 32-bit mode for optimized builds vs 2.068, something that is well appreciated :) 64-bit performance is mostly the same. What changed in the backend?
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On 2015-10-14 20:32, John Colvin wrote: got through to homebrew a faster this time. brew reinstall dmd --devel It's always available through DVM 1 second after announcement :) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Thursday, 15 October 2015 at 10:33:11 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 10/15/15 10:51 AM, Robert burner Schadek wrote: On Thursday, 15 October 2015 at 05:47:16 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Brian, should we add you? LMK. -- Andrei indeed! Dunn. -- Andrei nice
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On 10/15/15 10:51 AM, Robert burner Schadek wrote: On Thursday, 15 October 2015 at 05:47:16 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Brian, should we add you? LMK. -- Andrei indeed! Dunn. -- Andrei
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Thursday, 15 October 2015 at 05:47:16 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Brian, should we add you? LMK. -- Andrei indeed!
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On 10/15/15 3:05 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 23:44:34 UTC, Brian Schott wrote: On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 23:26:12 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Also tagging as 2.069 milestone helps (can you actually tag that yourself?). No. I would if I could. This one of the things I don't like about Github. (I can't tag pulls/issues even though I'm a member of the D-Programming-Language org) You're not in Team Phobos. Brian, should we add you? LMK. -- Andrei
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 23:44:34 UTC, Brian Schott wrote: On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 23:26:12 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Also tagging as 2.069 milestone helps (can you actually tag that yourself?). No. I would if I could. This one of the things I don't like about Github. (I can't tag pulls/issues even though I'm a member of the D-Programming-Language org) You're not in Team Phobos.
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 23:26:12 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Also tagging as 2.069 milestone helps (can you actually tag that yourself?). No. I would if I could. This one of the things I don't like about Github. (I can't tag pulls/issues even though I'm a member of the D-Programming-Language org)
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On 10/14/2015 08:09 PM, Brian Schott wrote: > > Is there any reason that these fixes won't be merged for 2.069? Please target the stable branch when fixing something. Also tagging as 2.069 milestone helps (can you actually tag that yourself?). I don't examine PRs before branching or tagging a version and only take what has been finished. The dates are announced early enough to plan ahead, but it'll prolly take a few more cycles until everyone has the next release in mind. -Martin
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 13:53:17 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Second beta for the 2.069.0 release. http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org -Martin got through to homebrew a faster this time. brew reinstall dmd --devel
Re: Beta D 2.069.0-b2
On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 13:53:17 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Second beta for the 2.069.0 release. http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org -Martin Is there any reason that these fixes won't be merged for 2.069? https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3711 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3688 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3689 I'd prefer not having to maintain my own fork of the allocators code for another release.
Beta D 2.069.0-b2
Second beta for the 2.069.0 release. http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org -Martin
