http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3715
--- Comment #4 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-09-20
04:36:35 PDT ---
Well, first of all, toString should always be const.
But pure and nothrow are two options that are also valid. I think some real
thought needs to go
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3420
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[PATCH] Allow string import |Allow string import of
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4382
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3554
--- Comment #8 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-20 05:03:38 PDT ---
This bug doesn't seem fixed in dmd 2.049. This program:
/// Return a random number in [0, 10 $(LPAREN)
void foo() {}
void main() {}
Generates an html that doesn't show
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4900
Summary: compiler still slow due to a single function
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4721
Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4901
Summary: std.algorithm.sort does not compile for interfaces
that cannot be printed.
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4290
--- Comment #6 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-09-20
06:03:43 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Why should the D compiler refuse to compile them?
The D compiler has to disallow or warn against common traps.
But opCmp is
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3554
--- Comment #9 from Johannes Pfau johannesp...@gmail.com 2010-09-20 07:28:22
PDT ---
Yeah, I also brought this up on the dmd-internals mailing list recently. The
problem is that the patch replaces the parenthesis with LPAREN and RPAREN
macros.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4899
Johannes Pfau johannesp...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4892
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4871
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4712
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4714
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3273
--- Comment #6 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-09-20 08:34:31 PDT ---
Have just discovered bug 4714, which still fails with this patch. I think this
patch is wrong.
--
Configure issuemail:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4632
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4641
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4613
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4696
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4541
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||necrom...@gmail.com
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4524
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4583
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4470
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3516
a...@aligature.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||a...@aligature.com
--- Comment #8
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3554
--- Comment #10 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-20 12:45:52 PDT ---
I may open a different bug report that asks for LPAREN and RPAREN macros to be
defined in dmd, to be sure this problem doesn't get lost.
--
Configure issuemail:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3554
Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3554
--- Comment #12 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-20 16:35:12 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #11)
They _are_ defined. They're $(LPAREN) and $(RPAREN).
Then where is the bug? Because there is a problem still.
--
Configure issuemail:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3554
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2010-09-20 16:45:48
PDT ---
Sorry, I didn't read the bug report all the way through. A new warning relating
to unmatched parens in ddoc popped up with 2.049, and it specifically
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4290
--- Comment #7 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-20 16:46:25 PDT ---
It seems we are in irreducible disagreement here.
But opCmp is a valid function! I can still call it, even though it's not put
into the typeinfo.
Of course. But when it
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4407
--- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-20 17:32:46 PDT ---
To keep the language semantics more uniform (instead of special-casing just in
methods), all redundant assignments may be flagged as errors:
void main() {
int x;
x
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4375
--- Comment #4 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-20 17:41:37 PDT ---
It seems that not just GCC flags this a possible error, in the Java audit rules
in some Google Software this problem is named Dangling Else:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4407
--- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-20 17:47:19 PDT ---
It's present among the Semantic Errors of Java code in the Google Web Toolkit
too:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4902
--- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-20 18:01:57 PDT ---
So far in my code I have never had a bug caused by this, so I consider this
low-priority.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4902
Summary: No label and variable with the same name error
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4375
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2010-09-20 18:26:31
PDT ---
The dangling else problem is essentially the official name of the problem of
knowing which if to put the last else with if you have a series of if
statements
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3847
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3847
Brad Roberts bra...@puremagic.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |WONTFIX
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4903
Summary: opopAssignRight is needed for operator overloading
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4290
--- Comment #8 from Kevin Bealer kevinbea...@gmail.com 2010-09-20 20:04:28
PDT ---
I think when you are defining opCmp, it's a bit like overriding a function
signature, therefore, if D tries to prevent function hijacking, it makes
perfect
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4898
Aldo Nunez aldonun...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4446
Shin Fujishiro rsi...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3175
Shin Fujishiro rsi...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsi...@gmail.com
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3847
--- Comment #15 from BCS shro8...@vandals.uidaho.edu 2010-09-20 22:15:25 PDT
---
(In reply to comment #11)
more
readable and less bug-prone operators.
Franky I find the fact that and || are not keywords make them *More*
readable and as a
43 matches
Mail list logo
