[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Issue 4728] New: Crash by protected/private constructor in an other module

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4728 Summary: Crash by protected/private constructor in an other module Product: D Version: D2 Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Keywords:

[Issue 4726] writeln(0.0 / 0.0) prints -nan

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4726 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-26 00:50:46 PDT --- OK. Thank you for your answer. I will not reopen this bug because it's a minor thing, but I don't like it because: From a purely ideal point of view, a NaN isn't a number,

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Issue 4729] New: std.algorithm: atrange iota behaviour

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4729 Summary: std.algorithm: atrange iota behaviour Product: D Version: D2 Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component:

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #11 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 05:20:08 PDT --- This is still full of dirty runtime calls and attempts to emulate half of lifetime.d (though the worst part is commented). Why doesn't it simply use the D standard way to

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #12 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-08-26 05:51:15 PDT --- (In reply to comment #11) This is still full of dirty runtime calls and attempts to emulate half of lifetime.d (though the worst part is commented).

[Issue 4729] std.algorithm: strange iota behaviour

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4729 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #13 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 06:20:17 PDT --- (In reply to comment #12) Why are runtime calls dirty? I don't use any undocumented runtime functions... Because they do more work than necessary and rely on more

[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721 --- Comment #8 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-08-26 06:22:33 PDT --- This helps, but only reduces it to 20 seconds (but a 66% reduction is pretty good!). I ran another round of profiling, and found we have a new

[Issue 4730] New: std.c.stdlib.exit in CTFE

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4730 Summary: std.c.stdlib.exit in CTFE Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: DMD

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #14 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-08-26 06:30:03 PDT --- (In reply to comment #13) (In reply to comment #12) Why are runtime calls dirty? I don't use any undocumented runtime functions... Because they

[Issue 4021] [CTFE] AA rehash

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4021 --- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-26 06:31:44 PDT --- With dmd 2.048 the error message is a little different: ...\dmd\src\druntime\import\object.di(354): Error: _aaRehash cannot be interpreted at compile time, because it has

[Issue 4729] std.algorithm: strange iota behaviour

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4729 --- Comment #2 from Max Klyga necrom...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 07:50:27 PDT --- This bug was introduced in 2.048, as is 2.047 iota stops but fails shortly after: src/phobos/std/algorithm.d(279): Enforcement failed -- Configure issuemail:

[Issue 4717] std.bitmanip.BitArray changes

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4717 --- Comment #8 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-26 07:56:20 PDT --- See also bug 4124 and bug 4123 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 4139] Forward reference error in front() of iterable struct

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4139 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 4731] New: cannot call protected base class method by using base class name

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4731 Summary: cannot call protected base class method by using base class name Product: D Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #15 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 10:12:08 PDT --- (In reply to comment #14) I'm not assuming anything about the memory layout. GC.qalloc gives me a block of data, and I'm using the data. Its interface is well defined without

[Issue 4713] PATCH for interface generation: cleanup, bugfixes and prettyprinting

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4713 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Issue 4732] New: __traits(identifier) performs constant folding on symbols

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4732 Summary: __traits(identifier) performs constant folding on symbols Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Keywords: patch,

[Issue 4721] compilation slow when compiling unittests on dcollections

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC|

[Issue 4602] Header generation turns 'typeof(x)(...)' into C-style cast

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4602 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Issue 4733] New: Possible bugs caused by dynamic arrays in boolean evaluation context

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4733 Summary: Possible bugs caused by dynamic arrays in boolean evaluation context Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity:

[Issue 4735] New: class that implements interface can override a static method

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4735 Summary: class that implements interface can override a static method Product: D Version: D2 Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity:

[Issue 4734] New: immutable return type specifier without parantheses confuses the compiler

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4734 Summary: immutable return type specifier without parantheses confuses the compiler Product: D Version: D2 Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW

[Issue 4080] Patch for building dynamic libraries on Mac OS X

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4080 --- Comment #5 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2010-08-26 14:21:48 PDT --- http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmd/changeset/372 I changed the location of the new files to be more consistent with druntime's existing conventions:

[Issue 3976] segfault on anonymous struct/union

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3976 --- Comment #4 from Ellery Newcomer ellery-newco...@utulsa.edu 2010-08-26 14:25:04 PDT --- (In reply to comment #3) There is no kmd file. Also this code seems to use Tango (dunno which version!). So it's not a usable test case. But I'm

[Issue 4736] New: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/hash-map.html

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4736 Summary: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/hash-map.html Product: D Version: D2 Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2

[Issue 4737] New: enum breaks linker when passed to typeid()

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4737 Summary: enum breaks linker when passed to typeid() Product: D Version: D2 Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2

[Issue 4734] immutable return type specifier without parantheses confuses the compiler

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4734 Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Issue 4734] immutable return type specifier without parantheses confuses the compiler

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4734 --- Comment #2 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 14:53:11 PDT --- You are absolutely right. I forgot about the ability to make functions themselves const/immutable. It would really help if that right-side rule was in

[Issue 4734] immutable return type specifier without parantheses confuses the compiler

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4734 Stephan Dilly s...@extrawurst.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||s...@extrawurst.org

[Issue 4734] immutable return type specifier without parantheses confuses the compiler

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4734 Stephan Dilly s...@extrawurst.org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement ---

[Issue 4734] immutable return type specifier without parantheses confuses the compiler

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4734 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 15:47:47 PDT --- The error message definitely needs to be improved. However, if you're arguing for consistency, you could easily argue that the current way is not consistent

[Issue 4571] Non-null class references/pointers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4571 --- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-26 16:41:58 PDT --- This is just half of a solution. Beside introducing nonnull pointers/references, and a handy syntax to denote them, to have a null-safe language you also need to require

[Issue 4625] in operator for AAs in SafeD code

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4625 --- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-26 16:58:40 PDT --- See also bug 4475 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 937] C-style variadic functions broken

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=937 Dan G. ven...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ven...@gmail.com --- Comment

[Issue 4571] Non-null class references/pointers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4571 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-08-26 17:27:34 PDT --- An example implementation of TypeState for Java: http://www.warski.org/blog/?cat=9 http://www.warski.org/typestate.html The original paper about typestates, Typestate: A