[Issue 1340] ICE on invalid use of template member declared in a class

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1340 clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 2203] typeof(class.template.foo) crashes compiler

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2203 clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dvdfr...@users.sf.net

[Issue 2203] typeof(class.template.foo) crashes compiler

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2203 --- Comment #5 from clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2009-04-19 01:46 --- This is actually the same as bug 1340. The typeof() isn't necessary. The error message should be something like: Uninstantiated templates have no members. Reduced test

[Issue 1011] illegal import declaration causes compile time segfault

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1011 --- Comment #2 from clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2009-04-19 03:19 --- Created an attachment (id=326) -- (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/attachment.cgi?id=326action=view) Patch against DMD 2.028 Import shouldn't do any semantic action if it

[Issue 1144] template mixin causes DMD crash

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1144 clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Issue 2857] New: False Warning about not found lib

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2857 Summary: False Warning about not found lib Product: D Version: 1.042 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component:

[Issue 2852] Cannot pass temporary result by reference (regression)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2852 --- Comment #2 from g...@nwawudu.com 2009-04-19 07:11 --- Looks like a deliberate change, see BUG 2621. --

[Issue 1030] Delegate literal as initializer is confused with struct initializer

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1030 s...@iname.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|struct in delegate requires |Delegate literal as

[Issue 2625] Creating new struct with literal bypasses immutability of members if struct is in array

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2625 --- Comment #8 from s...@iname.com 2009-04-19 07:59 --- (In reply to comment #7) To me, that's the compiler being correct - quite a different thing from the code being correct. both functions have the same code. That depends on

[Issue 2855] __traits: no way to get overloads and information for non-instance methods

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2855 dhase...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #2 from

[Issue 2855] __traits: no way to get overloads and information for non-instance methods

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2855 --- Comment #3 from dhase...@gmail.com 2009-04-19 11:22 --- Created an attachment (id=328) -- (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/attachment.cgi?id=328action=view) fixed patch --

[Issue 2855] __traits: no way to get overloads and information for non-instance methods

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2855 --- Comment #4 from dhase...@gmail.com 2009-04-19 11:25 --- Created an attachment (id=329) -- (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/attachment.cgi?id=329action=view) test cases I don't know what the preferred format is for the DMD test

[Issue 2858] New: D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858 Summary: D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers Product: D Version: 1.043 Platform: PC OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: spec

[Issue 2858] D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858 s...@iname.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||s...@iname.com

[Issue 2858] D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858 fa...@gmx.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fa...@gmx.ch --- Comment #2 from

[Issue 2858] D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858 --- Comment #3 from s...@iname.com 2009-04-19 18:31 --- (In reply to comment #2) I agree that making the finalizers more deterministic is a good idea. As discussed in the NG I see two problems: 1) the use of finalizers for any

[Issue 2858] D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858 --- Comment #4 from llu...@gmail.com 2009-04-19 18:41 --- (In reply to comment #1) To fix this, several paths can be taken: 1) Guarantee finalization, at least at program end 2) Remove finalizers completely from the collection

[Issue 2858] D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858 --- Comment #5 from s...@iname.com 2009-04-19 19:10 --- (In reply to comment #4) Perhaps better: The garbage collector runs the destructor for all unreferenced objects before freeing their memory. At program exit the memory

[Issue 2858] D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858 --- Comment #6 from llu...@gmail.com 2009-04-19 20:02 --- (In reply to comment #2) I agree that making the finalizers more deterministic is a good idea. As discussed in the NG I see two problems: 1) the use of finalizers for any

[Issue 2858] D specs allow GC implementations that don't call finalizers

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858 --- Comment #7 from llu...@gmail.com 2009-04-19 20:07 --- (In reply to comment #3) SDWF tries to get around this by running a collection if creation of a GDI object fails, in case it frees some system resources in order to try

[Issue 2859] New: enum convert error

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2859 Summary: enum convert error Product: D Version: 2.028 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Keywords: rejects-valid Severity: normal Priority: P2