[Issue 6114] New: immutable class variable not properly initialized when the constructor initializing it is non-shared
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6114
Summary: immutable class variable not properly initialized when
the constructor initializing it is non-shared
Product: D
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: jmdavisp...@gmx.com
--- Comment #0 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2011-06-05 23:31:52
PDT ---
This is related to bug# 6113. If you go into std.datetime and change the static
constructors which initialize UTC._utc or LocalTime._localTime (search for
_utc = or _localTime = - minus the quotes - to find them quickly), then
this code will fail:
import std.datetime;
shared static this()
{
assert(UTC() !is null);
assert(LocalTime() !is null);
}
void main()
{}
As long as those static constructors are shared, then this code is fine. But if
they're not shared, then the assertions fail. I believe that this is related to
bug# 4923 and the fact that immutable global variables and immutable static
variables are implicitly shared. I really think that the language should be
altered such that it be an error to attempt to initialize an immutable global
variable or immutable static variable in a non-shared constructor. Since,
they're implicitly shared, it doesn't make sense to initialize them in a
thread-local manner anyway. And it's obviously causing problems as-is.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6113] singletons in std.datetime are not created early enough
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6113 Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Platform|Other |All OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #1 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2011-06-05 23:37:20 PDT --- There's now a pull request with the fixes: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/81 Given the simplicity of the change, I expect that it'll be merged in fairly quickly. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6113] singletons in std.datetime are not created early enough
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6113 Brad Roberts bra...@puremagic.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bra...@puremagic.com --- Comment #2 from Brad Roberts bra...@puremagic.com 2011-06-06 00:00:14 PDT --- While changing them to shared static ctors is a good change, I there might well be a real bug here anyway. For the main thread's initialization, should it run through all shared static ctors then all non-shared static ctors as two passes? Or, should it run through all shared static and non-shared statics together in one pass? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6113] singletons in std.datetime are not created early enough
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6113 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2011-06-06 00:13:27 PDT --- That's why I opened bug# 6114. I'm going to close this one once my fix has been merged in, since that fixes the problem with std.datetime. But there _is_ a compiler bug here. Bug# 6114 covers that. Everything that I've read says that the static constructors are supposed supposed to be run in lexical order within a module, and the the compiler will order the initialization of the modules such that they're run in the order necessary to initialize everything before it's used. I haven't seen anything that would indicate that hared static constructors should be treated any differently from other static constructors as far as initialization order goes. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6090] DDoc parenthesis escape issues.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6090 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2011-06-06 00:18:06 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/f8e7f05c2161a2b99286f58bcb4c8295459860dd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/cce360cdf1a79b5fce2fe003ce28f48708693885 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/92a9682ef8f23b93f9a89de3116ba7b7dafebd48 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4107] Duplicate documentation for member function templates
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4107 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #3 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2011-06-06 00:19:29 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/f8e7f05c2161a2b99286f58bcb4c8295459860dd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/cce360cdf1a79b5fce2fe003ce28f48708693885 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/92a9682ef8f23b93f9a89de3116ba7b7dafebd48 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6114] immutable class variable not properly initialized when the constructor initializing it is non-shared
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6114 Brad Roberts bra...@puremagic.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bra...@puremagic.com --- Comment #1 from Brad Roberts bra...@puremagic.com 2011-06-06 00:21:37 PDT --- While you've framed this as related to immutable (and I agree with your assessment), there's a broader problem of the definition of order of initialization. For the main thread, is it one or two passes? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6109] 'nothrow' does not check slice indices
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6109 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED OS/Version|Mac OS X|All --- Comment #3 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2011-06-06 00:38:37 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/c516c2e0024908b19f7ce9b9b1836aabf4dbfb75 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6094] doesn't shortcut properly with CTFE
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6094
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
--- Comment #7 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-06-06 01:45:43 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Unless I'm missing something, actually intermixing evaluation and semantic
analysis enough to pull this sort of thing off would be enormously intrusive.
Additionally, do we _really_ want compile time code execution semantics to be
that different from runtime execution semantics? My gut says, No way.
There are *no* existing instances where CTFE ever does semantic analysis.
CTFE happens far too late for that. In fact CTFE isn't involved at all, the
desired behaviour would happen in the constant folding step -- but it doesn't
do semantic analysis either.
This would seem to be a request to change the semantics of the operator to
allow things like:
enum bool XXX = false undefined;
to compile. As well as being complicated to implement, I really don't think
that would be a good idea. It would introduce a corner case:
bool YYY = false undefined; // doesn't compile, still won't compile?
const bool ZZZ = false undefined; // I think this must be forbidden.
is(typeof(false undefined)) presumably would still return false, even though
it does compile in the XXX case.
Would any of these compile?
bool foo(bool z) { return z; }
enum bool AAA = foo(false undefined);
enum int BBB = (false undefined) ? 7 : 3;
enum int CCC = false ? undefined : 6;
enum bool DDD = true || undefined;
enum bool BBB = !((true || undefined)) undefined2;
The thing which is particularly difficult about implementing this, is that you
cannot run the semantic pass on the second branch of an expression, until
you have run the optimizer pass on the first branch.
And what happens with this:
enum bool CCC = is(typeof(false undefined));
Currently that returns false.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5673] Add lookahead and forgetful matching support std.regex
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5673 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a...@akbkhome.com --- Comment #2 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 02:17:15 PDT --- *** Issue 1394 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5169] Add(?:) Non-capturing parentheses group support to std.regex
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5169 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #4 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 02:27:19 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5673 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5673] Add lookahead and forgetful matching support std.regex
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5673 --- Comment #3 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 02:27:19 PDT --- *** Issue 5169 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3383] newVoid
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3383 --- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-06-06 03:26:11 PDT --- One case worth considering: auto mat = new int[5][5]; foreach (row; mat) row[] = 10; The way used to initialize a matrix to void is useful to initialize all of it to a defined value too. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6075] Cannot set value to associative array from a weakly-pure function when the value type has a (pure) opAssign
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6075 --- Comment #1 from kenn...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 03:27:16 PDT --- The bug was introduced in commit 44d7881 (fix bug 2451), manifesting itself as a Segfault (null pointer dereferencing). The Segfault was later converted to an error in commit 37aacfc (bug 5131). https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/44d7881 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/37aacfc -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4154] Incorrect DWARF section names on Mac
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4154 --- Comment #12 from Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com 2011-06-06 03:47:12 PDT --- So DMD should invoke dsymutil? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5936] Regression(2.050): Segfault when forward-referencing pure auto-return member function with parameter.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5936
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
Summary|DMD Segfault when |Regression(2.050): Segfault
|forward-referencing pure|when forward-referencing
|auto-return member function |pure auto-return member
|with parameter. |function with parameter.
--- Comment #1 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-06-06 06:18:17 PDT ---
The segfault is a simple null pointer dereference which can easily be patched.
mtype.c, TypeFunction::parameterEscapes, line 5369
if (purity)
{ /* With pure functions, we need only be concerned if p escapes
* via any return statement.
*/
-Type* tret = nextOf()-toBasetype();
-if (!isref !tret-hasPointers())
+Type* tret = nextOf() ? nextOf()-toBasetype() : NULL;
+if (!isref tret !tret-hasPointers())
{ /* The result has no references, so p could not be escaping
* that way.
*/
return FALSE;
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5936] Regression(2.050): Segfault when forward-referencing pure auto-return member function with parameter.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5936 --- Comment #2 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-06-06 06:21:15 PDT --- *** Issue 5844 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5844] DMD crash on infinite-recursive variadic template pure auto function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5844 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-06-06 06:21:15 PDT --- The patch in 5936 also fixes this. *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5936 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3843] Signed lengths (and other built-in values)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3843 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #1 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2011-06-06 06:27:39 PDT --- At this point it's virtually impossible to turn lengths to signed types. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3136] Incorrect and strange behavior of std.regexp.RegExp if using a pattern with optional prefix and suffix longer than 1 char
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3136 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #3 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:03:48 PDT --- Fixed for std.regex https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/9afb00e36b625322d7f1d8ec0fbd876c2b5c03fc -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2108] regexp.d: The greedy dotstar isn't so greedy
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2108 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #7 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:02:43 PDT --- Fixed for std.regex: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/9afb00e36b625322d7f1d8ec0fbd876c2b5c03fc -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4574] std.regex : breaks with empy string regex
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4574 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC||dmitry.o...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:11:08 PDT --- Fixed in version 2.053 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/da4a902341af2607199e0e23e9f954294d09bf2c -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4367] std.regex: Captures is not a random access range
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4367 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC||dmitry.o...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #3 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:10:36 PDT --- Apparently fixed in version 2.053 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/b68db973064ac7ad149cc42c3b4dc5416b576d21 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5019] In std.regex, empty capture at end of string causes error
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5019 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC||dmitry.o...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:18:29 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5511 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5511] std.regex optional capture with no-match cause error
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5511 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #4 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:27:40 PDT --- Fixed in version 2.053 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/ee612d047c8c8a840fb601180306f65ec28c7853 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5673] Add lookahead and forgetful matching support std.regex
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5673 --- Comment #4 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:29:32 PDT --- Fixed in version 2.053 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/ee612d047c8c8a840fb601180306f65ec28c7853 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5673] Add lookahead and forgetful matching support std.regex
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5673 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5857] std.regex (...){n, m} is bogus when (...) contains repetitions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5857 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:35:03 PDT --- Fixed in 2.053 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/c3ec6b2387d50ceab14cb648de6abb96b2b11f33 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6076] std.regex: c.*|d matches mm
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6076 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||dmitry.o...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 08:35:41 PDT --- Fixed: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/9afb00e36b625322d7f1d8ec0fbd876c2b5c03fc -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4627] Ideas for std.regex.match usage syntax
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4627
Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmitry.o...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06
08:41:35 PDT ---
It works exactly like that.
Keeping in mind that captures is a range [full match, submatch0, submatch1,
...] fro a given match.
And foreach (m; match(text, r\d)) { ... } iterates over consecutive matches
of regex (if g option is set, otherwise it's one iteration).
Resolved ?
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4154] Incorrect DWARF section names on Mac
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4154 --- Comment #13 from Robert Clipsham rob...@octarineparrot.com 2011-06-06 17:50:58 BST --- I believe so, there's not a lot of point right now though, given that the binaries produced by dmd cause dsymutil to fail. Struggling to find out what needs changing to stop dsymutil failing. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6115] New: Variadic documentation should import core.vararg.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6115 Summary: Variadic documentation should import core.vararg. Product: D Version: D2 Platform: Other URL: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/function.html OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: websites AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Jesse Phillips jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 09:51:14 PDT --- Documentation for Variadic functions still import std.stdarg. The module is replaced with core.vararg. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3843] Signed lengths (and other built-in values)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3843 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-06-06 10:17:33 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) At this point it's virtually impossible to turn lengths to signed types. I understand. A note: in Bugzilla I have some issues open regarding little D improvements. If they don't happen in something like another year, it will probably be quite harder to perform those changes, even if they are appreciated. I am open for any question about those issues. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4627] Ideas for std.regex.match usage syntax
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4627
--- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-06-06 10:33:45 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Resolved ?
You have improved the D regular expressions a lot, it seems.
To me this program crashes at runtime (DMD 2.053):
import std.stdio, std.regex;
void main() {
foreach (m; match(125 155 ss25, r\d+))
writeln(m);
}
If I use this line it works:
writeln(m.toString());
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4627] Ideas for std.regex.match usage syntax
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4627 --- Comment #3 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 10:43:32 PDT --- Yeah, that's very embarassing bug related to writeln/formattedWrite. The reason is that toString seems to have less priority then range formatting. And ranges that return elements of the same type as range itself are unexpected in that formatting code. In essence, it's the same issue as this one http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4604 So let's keep thing where they belong and if you have no futher things for this bugzilla, I think you should close it. And I think adding this simple example in issue 4604 won't hurt. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6105] static: doesn't qualify static this constructors
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6105 Dan Sănduleac sanduleac@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #1 from Dan Sănduleac sanduleac@gmail.com 2011-06-06 10:56:51 PDT --- Sorry about that, apparently that's the way it's supposed to work. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/class.html#StaticConstructor -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4604] A stack overflow with writeln
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4604
--- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-06-06 11:09:15 PDT ---
Dmitry Olshansky has suggested me to add this that comes from issue 4627:
To me this program crashes at runtime (DMD 2.053):
import std.stdio, std.regex;
void main() {
foreach (m; match(125 155 ss25, r\d+))
writeln(m);
}
If I use this line it works:
writeln(m.toString());
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6085] The filename part of a thrown core.exception.UnicodeException is incomprehensible
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6085 kenn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #4 from kenn...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 12:30:15 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/commit/d1ae5aa395a5a545f48c0c92d4338de19e6f3887 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5925] Comparing associative array with a type constructor (const/shared/immutable) causes segfault
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5925 kenn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from kenn...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 12:32:23 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/commit/b2bbaee6ffbc316b67278ce35bfa6ab73db17a7d -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1983] Big Hole in Const System
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1983 Rob Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandf...@jhu.edu --- Comment #6 from Rob Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu 2011-06-06 12:42:15 PDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Janice Caron wrote: --- Comment #1 from fvbom...@wxs.nl 2008-04-10 05:55 --- IMHO the problem here isn't the type of (a.x) but the fact that it's allowed to compile at all. Same thing. You just stated the problem differently. a.x = 2; won't compile because a.x is typed const. Wheras (a.x)(2); will compile because (a.x) is not typed const. The fact that it compiles is a /symptom/. I disagree. As long as (a.x) for mutable a and const x (and similar cases with invariant, etc.) doesn't compile, there's no need for 'delegate() const'. See below. We can treat the symptom, but I'd rather treat the disease. To treat the disease, the type system must allow types such as ReturnType delegate(Params...) const to exist. Likewise ReturnType delegate(Params...) invariant and eventually, we're even going to need ReturnType delegate(Params...) invariant pure I can see the need for the pure variant, but not any of the others. I see no reason to distinguish between a delegate to a const method and one to a normal method, as long as you can't create a delegate to a method using an object of inappropriate constness. Who (except again in case of 'pure') cares if the object pointed to by the void* .ptr changes if the method is called? Obviously whoever created the delegate must have had mutable access to it[1] (since that should IMHO be the only way to create such a delegate), so they have every right to create a delegate that mutates it. In other words: since you don't have a useful explicit reference to the object, who cares if it's const or not? [1] Or invoked undefined behavior by somehow casting away const, in which case it doesn't matter *what* happens. const delegates are extremely important to parallelism and concurrency, i.e. the routines in std.parallelism. This is because calling a const delegate from multiple threads is _safe_, given guarantees that mutating members/delegates won't be called until after synchronization barriers. (i.e. using const delegates provides race-safety to parallel foreach, reduce, etc.) (Well, except for the corner case of accessing a global shared variable) -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5003] regex(replace with delegate) sample doesn't work
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5003 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC||dmitry.o...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 13:18:54 PDT --- Works on dmd 2.053. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6111] Escaping reference to local variable not detected
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6111
--- Comment #1 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2011-06-06
15:57:49 PDT ---
Reduced test case:
import std.c.stdio;
auto mymap()
{
int x = 42;
int fun(int a) { return x + a; }
auto map()(int r)
{
struct Result
{
int _input;
int back()
{
return fun(_input);
}
this(int input)
{
_input = input;
}
}
return Result(r);
}
return map(1);
}
void main()
{
printf(%d\n, mymap().back());
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6116] New: May not join spawn()'ed threads
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6116
Summary: May not join spawn()'ed threads
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: x86_64
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P2
Component: Phobos
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: acehr...@yahoo.com
--- Comment #0 from Ali Cehreli acehr...@yahoo.com 2011-06-06 16:33:09 PDT ---
Version: 2.053
The command line:
~/dmd2.053/linux/bin64/dmd deneme.d -ofdeneme -unittest -J. -w
Although I have multiple threads spawning each other here, I also had problems
with just a single thread spawned from main. I wanted to keep this example as
it exposes many different outputs for me.
import std.stdio;
import std.concurrency;
import core.thread;
void foo()
{
foreach (i; 0 .. 5) {
Thread.sleep(dur!msecs(500));
writeln(i, foo);
}
}
void intermediate3()
{
spawn(foo);
writeln(intermediate3 done);
}
void intermediate2()
{
spawn(intermediate3);
writeln(intermediate2 done);
}
void intermediate()
{
spawn(intermediate2);
writeln(intermediate done);
}
void main()
{
spawn(intermediate);
writeln(main done);
}
1) ThreadException:
$ time ./deneme
main done
intermediate done
intermediate2 done
intermediate3 done
core.thread.ThreadException@src/core/thread.d(866): Unable to join thread
real0m0.003s
user0m0.000s
sys0m0.000s
2) No output from foo() (foo() is not joined)
$ time ./deneme
main done
intermediate done
intermediate2 done
intermediate3 done
real0m0.003s
user0m0.000s
sys0m0.000s
3) Segmentation fault:
$ time ./deneme
main done
intermediate done
Segmentation fault
real0m0.003s
user0m0.000s
sys0m0.000s
4) Expected behavior:
$ time ./deneme
main done
intermediate done
intermediate2 done
intermediate3 done
0 foo
1 foo
2 foo
3 foo
4 foo
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6116] May not join spawn()'ed threads
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6116 --- Comment #1 from Ali Cehreli acehr...@yahoo.com 2011-06-06 16:38:06 PDT --- Apparently I clipped the timings for the last run. When it joins successfully, the program takes long, seemingly waiting for the foo() thread: $ time ./deneme main done intermediate done intermediate2 done intermediate3 done 0 foo 1 foo 2 foo 3 foo 4 foo real0m2.504s user0m0.000s sys0m0.000s -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6117] New: Parameter names of equivalent function aliases are merged
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6117
Summary: Parameter names of equivalent function aliases are
merged
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2011-06-06
16:44:01 PDT ---
void function(int a, int b) x;
void function(int c, int d) y;
void main()
{
writeln(typeof(x).stringof);
writeln(typeof(y).stringof);
}
Prints:
void function(int a, int b)
void function(int a, int b)
It seems the two alias get merged into one, and y will resolve to x. I don't
know what else could cause the loss of parameter names for y in this case.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6111] Escaping reference to local variable not detected
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6111 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2011-06-06 17:23:56 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/20510a31133327d768ae5335c5fbfc3e611a1213 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6118] New: nested overloaded foreach in contract crashes dmd
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6118
Summary: nested overloaded foreach in contract crashes dmd
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: viritrilbi...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Mike Shulman viritrilbi...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 17:34:52
PDT ---
The following code crashes DMD v2.053 with Internal error: ../ztc/cgcs.c 363:
class foo {
int opApply(int delegate(ref int) dg) const { return 0; }
foo bar()
out(result) {
foreach (x ; result)
foreach (y ; result)
assert(x);
}
body { return this; }
}
I haven't been able to simplify the code any further and still reproduce the
crash. Removing the second foreach makes it compile, as does replacing
assert(x) with anything not referring to x.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3797] Regression(2.038): Implicit conversion between incompatible function pointers
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3797 --- Comment #13 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 19:33:41 PDT --- *** Issue 4891 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4891] Assignment from non-pure function to pure function pointer compiles when it shouldn't
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4891 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 19:33:40 PDT --- This is a dupe of 3797, the purity of a function pointer (among other things) is not checked when performing implicit conversions. With dmd pull 88 you get the following error from dmd: testx.d(26): Error: constructor testx.S.this (int function(int) pure func) is no t callable using argument types (int function(int num)) testx.d(26): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression ( add1) of type int fu nction(int num) to int function(int) pure *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 3797 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5434] Function pointers not properly typechecked
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5434 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 19:39:53 PDT --- With my proposed fix to 3797, this gives the error: testx.d(7): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression ( GetX) of type void fu nction(short _param_0, short _param_1, short i) to void function(string) *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 3797 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3797] Regression(2.038): Implicit conversion between incompatible function pointers
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3797 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||eatingstap...@gmail.com --- Comment #14 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 19:39:53 PDT --- *** Issue 5434 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5421] Ref function pointers can only be made with auto
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5421 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 19:46:53 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 2753 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3797] Regression(2.038): Implicit conversion between incompatible function pointers
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3797 --- Comment #15 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 20:01:10 PDT --- The reason this happens is because TypeFunction does not override constConv. When called on TypeFunction, TypeNext::constConv is actually called, which only compares the return type. (next in TypeFunction is the return type) I've created a possible fix in dmd pull 88 which defines TypeFunction::constConv to disallow most implicit conversions between function pointers. The current patch allows reasonable purity, safety and nothrow conversions. If you're interested, please take a look and see if all cases are covered. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5986] Function pointers wrongly typed
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5986 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 21:04:57 PDT --- The reason the second method works is because of issue 3797. The fact that ClassType.nonstaticmethod returns an invalid function pointer is definitely a bug. But what should it do? I see the following options: 1. Disallow it completely - you can still get the address from a delegate's function pointer 2. Make it return void* 3. Make it return a callable function pointer that matches the abi for member function calls. I'm not sure what sensible use cases there are for getting the address of a member function, but 1 seems the most reasonable. The original bug report asks for 3, but that does not seem particularly useful. eg. auto funcptr = Class.func; auto instance = new Class(); funcptr(instance); vs auto instance = new Class(); instance.func(); -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2509] Compiler rejects inner function that return references
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2509 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 21:28:24 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5959 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5828] Cannot declare a variable of type X function() ref
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5828 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 21:26:33 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 2753 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2753] Cannot declare pointer to function returning ref
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2753 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||timon.g...@gmx.ch --- Comment #8 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2011-06-06 21:26:33 PDT --- *** Issue 5828 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
