[Issue 6901] New: wrong error override cannot be applied to variable in CTFE forward reference
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6901
Summary: wrong error override cannot be applied to variable
in CTFE forward reference
Product: D
Version: D1 D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: clugd...@yahoo.com.au
--- Comment #0 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-11-07 01:24:26 PST ---
Applies to both D1 and D2, at least as far back as 2.040. It's a forward
reference error, triggered in this case by CTFE.
class Base6900
{
void foo() {}
}
class Derived6900: Base6900
{
override void foo() { }
}
int test6900()
{
Derived6900 d = new Derived6900; // for github HEAD
// Derived6900 d = null; // for older versions
d.foo();
return 1;
}
static assert(test6900());
test.d(8): Error: variable test.Derived6900.foo.this override cannot be applied
to variable
test.d(15):called from here: d.foo()
test.d(19):called from here: test6900()
test.d(19): Error: static assert (test6900()) is not evaluatable at compile
tim
e
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6902] Different pure nothrow int() types
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6902 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #1 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-11-07 03:21:28 PST --- I thought we got rid of those crazy function types. Seems that they've survived in alias declarations somehow. The declaration of T shouldn't compile. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6902] Different pure nothrow int() types
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6902 --- Comment #2 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2011-11-07 03:33:51 PST --- Good reducing! I found a function/delegate literal type inference bug. I have done Phobos unit tests with my patch, and this resolves Phobos build breaking in Windows. http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/test_data.ghtml?dataid=113170 Please wait the patch a while. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6903] New: Auto Return Doesn't Work With Nested Functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6903
Summary: Auto Return Doesn't Work With Nested Functions
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: dsim...@yahoo.com
--- Comment #0 from David Simcha dsim...@yahoo.com 2011-11-07 08:38:26 PST ---
This may technically be an enhancement request, but it seems like a massive,
glaring inconsistency for no good reason, so I consider it a bug.
void main() {
auto foo() {
return 3;
}
}
test.d(2): function declaration without return type. (Note that constructors
are always named 'this')
test.d(2): no identifier for declarator foo()
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6903] Auto Return Doesn't Work With Nested Functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6903 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc --- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-11-07 09:34:33 PST --- See bug 4401 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6903] Auto Return Doesn't Work With Nested Functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6903 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2011-11-07 09:54:21 PST --- This is parser problem, and there is no reason to reject it from dmd internally (e.g. The return type of function literal is almost inferred). *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 4401 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4401] auto functions cannot be inner functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4401 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dsim...@yahoo.com --- Comment #7 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2011-11-07 09:54:21 PST --- *** Issue 6903 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 6904] New: Skip Setting up Stack Frame if No Stack is Used
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6904
Summary: Skip Setting up Stack Frame if No Stack is Used
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Keywords: performance
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: dsim...@yahoo.com
--- Comment #0 from David Simcha dsim...@yahoo.com 2011-11-07 10:05:40 PST ---
This could affect performance slightly in real-world code if virtual functions
are used to return constants in some overrides.
test.d:
int main() {
return 0;
}
dmd -c -O -inline -release test.d
Disassembly of _Dmain in test.o:
_Dmain PROC
pushrbp ; _ 55
mov rbp, rsp; 0001 _ 48: 8B. EC
xor eax, eax; 0004 _ 31. C0
pop rbp ; 0006 _ 5D
ret ; 0007 _ C3
_Dmain ENDP
Do we really need to do the push rbp; mov rbp, rsp; pop rbp when the function
doesn't actually use any stack and just sets eax to zero and returns? GDC
elides these extra instructions. In GDC, compiled with -O1 or higher, _Dmain's
body is:
_Dmain PROC
xor eax, eax; _ 31. C0
ret ; 0002 _ C3
_Dmain ENDP
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4401] auto functions cannot be inner functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4401 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Platform|x86 |All OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #8 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2011-11-07 10:35:05 PST --- D2 Patch: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/500 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6905] New: ref acts as auto ref when return type is missing
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6905
Summary: ref acts as auto ref when return type is missing
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Keywords: accepts-invalid
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2011-11-07
11:17:13 PST ---
struct Foo
{
int x;
ref noReturnType()
{
return x;
}
}
void main()
{
auto foo = Foo();
foo.noReturnType = 5;
assert(foo.x == 5);
}
Should this be allowed? It doesn't make much sense, especially when you can
write code like this:
struct Foo
{
ref noReturnType()
{
return 1; // does an rvalue return
}
}
void main()
{
auto foo = Foo();
auto x = foo.noReturnType();
}
This compiles and only confuses the reader.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6906] New: Cannot assign value into associative array if contains opAssign
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6906
Summary: Cannot assign value into associative array if contains
opAssign
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Jesse Phillips jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com 2011-11-07
12:24:00 PST ---
This code fails to compile because the struct S implement opAssign and the
compiler tries using it rather than the associative arrays insert.
void main() {
S[string] ss;
S s;
ss[hello] = s;
}
struct S {
void opAssign(int i) {
}
}
test.d(6): Error: function test.S.opAssign (int i) is not callable using
argument types (S)
test.d(6): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (s) of type S to int
test.d(6): Error: function test.S.opAssign (int i) is not callable using
argument types (S)
test.d(6): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (s) of type S to int
PS C:\Documents and Settings\jphillips\src\Juno dmd test.d
test.d(5): Error: function test.S.opAssign (int i) is not callable using
argument types (S)
test.d(5): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (s) of type S to int
test.d(5): Error: function test.S.opAssign (int i) is not callable using
argument types (S)
test.d(5): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (s) of type S to int
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4401] auto functions cannot be inner functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4401 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #9 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2011-11-07 21:43:53 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/9f6e32ec88f4137b5030785813cd7b20c94831d5 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6906] Cannot assign value into associative array if contains opAssign
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6906 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #1 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-11-07 23:07:16 PST --- I don't think this is a bug. I think the behaviour is intuitive. ss[hello] = s; looks like an assignment, and it currently behaves like one. This code doesn't compile, either: S[2] ss; S s; ss[0] = s; As you've defined it, S cannot participate in any assignment of any kind. You can't even write: S s; S t; t = s; -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6901] wrong error override cannot be applied to variable in CTFE forward reference
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6901 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2011-11-07 23:09:24 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/366a1d759ed45d2aa4bfcb431a0d1ded1f8cf0fc https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/a25c281637a5cfdfad7eb55487ebfffca8bd49df -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6416] [CTFE] Declaration static struct is not yet implemented in CTFE
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6416 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2011-11-07 23:09:45 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/366a1d759ed45d2aa4bfcb431a0d1ded1f8cf0fc https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/a25c281637a5cfdfad7eb55487ebfffca8bd49df -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6907] New: [CTFE] delete statements should be permitted
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6907 Summary: [CTFE] delete statements should be permitted Product: D Version: D1 D2 Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: clugd...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #0 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-11-07 23:50:21 PST --- Although they're not much use, there doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to disallow them. The spec gets shorter if they're allowed. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6908] New: [CTFE] C-style variadiac functions should be permitted
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6908 Summary: [CTFE] C-style variadiac functions should be permitted Product: D Version: D1 D2 Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: clugd...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #0 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-11-07 23:51:58 PST --- There doesn't seem to be any reason to disallow them. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
