[Issue 6178] Struct inside the AA are not init correctly
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6178 --- Comment #13 from Maxim Fomin ma...@maxim-fomin.ru 2013-01-16 01:18:30 PST --- Well, seems in 2.061 the behavior was changed. Without any options, the output is like: -1154412584 opAssign called (big value) 1 dtor called -1154412584 dtor called With -release or -noboundscheck the output is more robust: 0 opAssign called 1 dtor called 0 dtor called With -O option output is: 32638 opAssign called // close to signed short int max 1 dtor called 32638 dtor called -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9325] New: writeln of const class instance
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9325
Summary: writeln of const class instance
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: x86
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Phobos
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: bearophile_h...@eml.cc
--- Comment #0 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 01:45:53 PST ---
This program:
import std.stdio: writeln;
class Foo { int x = 5; }
void main() {
auto f = new Foo;
writeln(f);
}
Prints (dmd 2.062alpha):
test1.Foo
While this:
import std.stdio: writeln;
class Foo { int x = 5; }
void main() {
const f = new Foo;
writeln(f);
}
Gives:
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\format.d(2435): Error: template instance
formatObject!(LockingTextWriter, const(Foo), char)
formatObject!(LockingTextWriter, const(Foo), char) does not match template
declaration formatObject(Writer, T, Char)(ref Writer w, ref T val, ref
FormatSpec!(Char) f) if (hasToString!(T, Char))
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\format.d(2435): Error: function expected before (), not
formatObject!(LockingTextWriter, const(Foo), char) of type void
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\format.d(2863): Error: template instance
std.format.formatValue!(LockingTextWriter, const(Foo), char) error
instantiating
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\format.d(415):instantiated from here:
formatGeneric!(LockingTextWriter, const(Foo), char)
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\stdio.d(714):instantiated from here:
formattedWrite!(LockingTextWriter, char, const(Foo))
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\stdio.d(1620):instantiated from here:
write!(const(Foo),char)
test2.d(5):instantiated from here: writeln!(const(Foo))
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\format.d(415): Error: template instance
std.format.formatGeneric!(LockingTextWriter, const(Foo), char) error
instantiating
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\stdio.d(714):instantiated from here:
formattedWrite!(LockingTextWriter, char, const(Foo))
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\stdio.d(1620):instantiated from here:
write!(const(Foo),char)
test2.d(5):instantiated from here: writeln!(const(Foo))
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\stdio.d(714): Error: template instance
std.format.formattedWrite!(LockingTextWriter, char, const(Foo)) error
instantiating
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\stdio.d(1620):instantiated from here:
write!(const(Foo),char)
test2.d(5):instantiated from here: writeln!(const(Foo))
...\dmd2\src\phobos\std\stdio.d(1620): Error: template instance
std.stdio.File.write!(const(Foo),char) error instantiating
test2.d(5):instantiated from here: writeln!(const(Foo))
test2.d(5): Error: template instance std.stdio.writeln!(const(Foo)) error
instantiating
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6178] Struct inside the AA are not init correctly
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6178 --- Comment #14 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 01:46:18 PST --- (In reply to comment #13) Well, seems in 2.061 the behavior was changed. Without any options, the output is like: -1154412584 opAssign called (big value) 1 dtor called -1154412584 dtor called With -release or -noboundscheck the output is more robust: 0 opAssign called 1 dtor called 0 dtor called With -O option output is: 32638 opAssign called // close to signed short int max 1 dtor called 32638 dtor called This is shitty but I'll use -release for the moment. BTW it seems to require both module with struct *and* the one where AA is used to be compiled wiht -release. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9322] Internal error: ../ztc/cod1.c 3510 with SIMD on OSX 32
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9322 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2013-01-16 01:49:22 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1490 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4269] Regression(2.031): invalid type accepted if evaluated while errors are gagged
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4269 --- Comment #28 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-01-16 01:52:33 PST --- Commit pushed to dmd-1.x at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/f0a12c85632e5bba8bf0752aa66f2ab97317e5c9 Fix bug 4269 case 13:invalid template accepted if evaluated while errors are gagged Need to ungag template declarations if they are forward referenced. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6178] Struct inside the AA are not init correctly
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6178
--- Comment #15 from Maxim Fomin ma...@maxim-fomin.ru 2013-01-16 02:18:45 PST
---
(In reply to comment #14)
This is shitty but I'll use -release for the moment. BTW it seems
to require both module with struct *and* the one where AA is used to be
compiled wiht -release.
Than this a part of a bigger shit.
/* Known as a problem of filling newly created space of AA array
with T.init before assigning actual object.
If operation is interrupted, this leads to AA array containing
orphan T.init objects by no reason. Was reported in BZ.
*/
import std.stdio;
int foo()
{
throw new Exception();
}
int[int] array;
void main()
{
try
{
array[1] = foo();
}
catch(Exception e)
{
}
writeln(array);
}
Compiling with -O = [1:0]
Compiling with -release = []
Compiling with -noboundscheck = []
So, it appears that there is not only bug with AA assignment, but the bug
depends on compiler options.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9326] New: writeln to simply show pointed data
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9326
Summary: writeln to simply show pointed data
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: Phobos
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: bearophile_h...@eml.cc
--- Comment #0 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 02:24:58 PST ---
A small demo program:
import std.stdio: writeln;
struct Foo {
int x;
}
struct Node {
Node* next;
}
void main() {
Foo f = Foo(1);
writeln(Simple struct: , f);
Foo* pf = new Foo(2);
writeln(Struct from pointer: , pf);
Node* ptr = new Node(new Node(null));
writeln(Singly linked list: , ptr);
Node* n1 = new Node(null);
Node* n2 = new Node(n1);
n1.next = n2;
writeln(Circular singly linked list: , n1);
}
Currently prints (dmd 2.062alpha):
Simple struct: Foo(1)
Struct from pointer: 1601F90
Singly linked list: 19C1F80
Circular singly linked list: 1601F60
For debugging, or just during the writing of code, I'd often like to see what's
pointed by those pointers.
So I suggest to enhance Phobos textual formatting a little, to produce
something simple like (on 64 bit pointers are longer):
Simple struct: Foo(1)
Struct from pointer: 1601F90*Foo(2)
Singly linked list: 1601F80*Node(19C1F70*Node(null))
Circular singly linked list: 1551F60*Node(1551F50*Node(1551F60*...))
Notes:
- Numbers like 1551F50 are the pointer values in hex;
- The * helps remember that they are deferenced;
- The of 1551F50* help better tell apart the pointer from the pointed
data.
- The ellipsis ... in Node(1551F60*...) means that this call to writeln has
already shown what this pointer points to.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This change in textual formatting is not meant to influence the result of %x,
just %s:
import std.stdio: writefln;
struct Foo {
int x;
}
void main() {
Foo* pf = new Foo(100);
writefln(%s, pf);
writefln(%x, pf);
}
Currently prints:
1981F90
1981f90
After that improvement it should print something like:
1581F90*Foo(100)
1581f90
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To keep things simple it's better to not follow untyped pointers (void*):
import std.stdio: writefln;
struct Foo {
int x;
}
void main() {
Foo* pf = new Foo(100);
void* ptr = cast(void*)pf;
writefln(%s, pf);
}
It should print just:
1571F90
Or maybe something similar to:
1581F90*void
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9326] writeln to simply show pointed data
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9326 Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmitry.o...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 02:53:08 PST --- (In reply to comment #0) I don't think that stuffing various debugging trickery into writeln is a good idea. What about a dedicated primitive that may (by default!) use more convenient formating fot this purpose? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2485] non-static initialization of struct using static initializer syntax generates wrong code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2485 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #2 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2013-01-16 03:06:07 PST --- Works now, I think it was the same as bug 2850. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8741] wrong code for struct member initialized using struct constructor
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8741 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||slud...@outerproduct.org --- Comment #4 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2013-01-16 03:07:00 PST --- *** Issue 3863 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 4269] Regression(2.031): invalid type accepted if evaluated while errors are gagged
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4269 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9326] writeln to simply show pointed data
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9326 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 03:11:59 PST --- (In reply to comment #1) Thank you for your comment. I don't think that stuffing various debugging trickery into writeln is a good idea. I keep hearing similar comments since few years ago I asked for a better printing of associative arrays and arrays in D. But once you give D programmers such better printing (thanks to Hara work), they seem happy and unwilling to go back to a more limited printing. It's not a trick, showing what a pointer points to is printing of a basic built-in data structure of the language. Probably I got spoiled by modern dynamic languages, that being often used on the REPL, enjoy having good default printing. If you think this enhancement request is not a good idea, you must explain why. I have explained why it's a handy thing to have. (The implementation of this feature requires the formatting function to keep a set of already seen pointers. For simplicity I think a built-in associative array of void* is enough). What about a dedicated primitive that may (by default!) use more convenient formating fot this purpose? Once the improved format() is implemented in Phobos, what's the point of artificially restricting the usefulness of writeln()? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9097] Value range propagation to disable some array bound tests
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9097 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 23:23:26 EST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1493 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9326] writeln to simply show pointed data
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9326
--- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 04:48:06 PST ---
Beside dynamic arrays, associative arrays and enums, D writeln is able to print
lazy ranges, so writeln is already rather capable:
import std.stdio, std.range;
void main() {
writeln(iota(6));
}
Shows:
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9326] writeln to simply show pointed data
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9326 --- Comment #4 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 04:57:33 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) Thank you for your comment. I don't think that stuffing various debugging trickery into writeln is a good idea. I keep hearing similar comments since few years ago I asked for a better printing of associative arrays and arrays in D. But once you give D programmers such better printing (thanks to Hara work), they seem happy and unwilling to go back to a more limited printing. What Kenji did was a better printing for ranges in general that is far more powerful (and better integrated) then arrays. It's not a trick, showing what a pointer points to is printing of a basic built-in data structure of the language. Probably I got spoiled by modern dynamic languages, that being often used on the REPL, enjoy having good default printing. If you think this enhancement request is not a good idea, you must explain why. I have explained why it's a handy thing to have. (The implementation of this feature requires the formatting function to keep a set of already seen pointers. For simplicity I think a built-in associative array of void* is enough). It's good that you answered it already: not everybody needs it yet it requires more complex code to be pulled in for everybody. Dynamic languages doesn't ever consider cost-to-benefit ratio it seems. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5922] immutable and static variables usage in asm{}
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5922 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 00:04:57 EST --- For some reason x's initializer is x = 10 instead of just 10. Probably a side effect of some hack. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9326] writeln to simply show pointed data
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9326 --- Comment #5 from Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.o...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 05:11:45 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) If you think this enhancement request is not a good idea, you must explain why. I have explained why it's a handy thing to have. (The implementation of this feature requires the formatting function to keep a set of already seen pointers. For simplicity I think a built-in associative array of void* is enough). BTW if writeln starts allocating GC memory like that we'll have a revolt among users. The special case of debugging output doesn't look good enough to compromise the basic no garabage involved guarantee. Plus debug prints inside of a finalizer risk killing a program with current GC. This situation with GC should/might improve in the future though but it's just another problem to be aware of. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9320] Non-POD status of a struct correlated to bad inlining.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9320 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Sicard dran...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 05:19:13 PST --- Note, LDC produces equivalent code in both cases: --- fldtbyte ptr 028h[RSP] fldtbyte ptr 018h[RSP] fldST(0) fmulST,ST(2) fxchST(1) faddpST(2),ST fdivpST(1),ST fldtbyte ptr 8[RSP] fsubpST(1),ST fstptbyte ptr [RDI] movAX,[0Eh][RIP] mov0Eh[RDI],AX movEAX,[0Ah][RIP] mov0Ah[RDI],EAX ret --- -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6319] debug's relaxed purity does not apply to nested scopes
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6319
yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yebbl...@gmail.com
Platform|x86 |All
AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|yebbl...@gmail.com
Summary|Problem with prinft inside |debug's relaxed purity does
|debug{} of pure function|not apply to nested scopes
OS/Version|Windows |All
--- Comment #4 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 00:27:22 EST ---
Reduced:
int x;
void main() pure
{
debug
{
{
x = 0;
}
}
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6319] debug's relaxed purity does not apply to nested scopes
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6319 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull --- Comment #5 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 00:29:30 EST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1494 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6408] string[].init gives a wrong type
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6408 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|x86 |All AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|yebbl...@gmail.com OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #6 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:00:26 EST --- T[], T[T] and T[N] I'm not sure T* can be done like this, but it also produces an error instead of being ignored silently. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1495 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6783] Implicit cast to immutable from pure function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6783 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|x86 |All Resolution||DUPLICATE OS/Version|Windows |All Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #4 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:07:31 EST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 8408 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8408] Purity calculation should be improved
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8408 --- Comment #12 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:07:31 EST --- *** Issue 6783 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 9230] Incorrect implicit immutable conversion occurs in pure function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9230 --- Comment #8 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:11:52 EST --- Issue 8998 is related -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8408] Purity calculation should be improved
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8408 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #13 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:14:02 EST --- Is issue 8998 a regression caused by this patch? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8357] ICE instantiating template inside of a unittest
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8357 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:24:21 EST --- Cannot reproduce with dmd 2.062 head -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8357] ICE instantiating template inside of a unittest
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8357 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |WORKSFORME -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5038] Change class 'invariant' syntax to emulate 'unittest'
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5038 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:28:15 EST --- The parentheses are necessary, because without them invariant is a deprecated alias for immutable. *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 6453 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8128] unittest blocks should be allowed in interfaces
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8128 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6566] Length of run-time constant array
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6566 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:48:32 EST --- This seems to work now with 2.062 head Unlike the similar problem in issue 5922 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6708] immutable ref implicit cast to const ref
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6708 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|x86 |All AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|yebbl...@gmail.com OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 01:58:11 EST --- Only the first one gives an error now. Happening because the const-folder is overly aggressive. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1496 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6794] ICE(expression.c): with inout
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6794 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME Severity|normal |critical --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:01:32 EST --- No crash for me with 2.062 head on win32. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6795] ICE(cgcs.c): Incrementing an enum array item
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6795 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Severity|normal |critical --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:02:27 EST --- Still exists with 2.062 head -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7225] immutable argument by const ref
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7225 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:06:19 EST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 6708 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6708] immutable ref implicit cast to const ref
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6708 --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:06:19 EST --- *** Issue 7225 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 7226] Refused pure nothrow ctor syntax
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7226 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:08:02 EST --- Basically the same thing as issue 6415, also applies to unittests -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7570] Missing error in ctfe for dereferencing a pointer passed as a parameter
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7570 --- Comment #3 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:11:46 EST --- Now fails with: DMD v2.062 DEBUG testx.d(4):called from here: contains(froogler) testx.d(4): Error: static assert (!contains(froogler)) is not evaluatable at compile time -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7837] A refused opBinaryRight(in) with bad error message
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7837 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:14:10 EST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 3905 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3905] Wrong error message with wrong opBinary(in)
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3905 --- Comment #6 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:14:10 EST --- *** Issue 7837 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 8100] [ICE] with templated subclassing
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8100 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:18:03 EST --- No ice with 2.062 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8111] [ICE] With templated recursive return-inferred function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8111 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:18:24 EST --- No ice with 2.062 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8374] One missed array literal interpretation as int[2]
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8374 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:22:44 EST --- Is this the same as issue 8277? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8149] Possible forward reference mistake
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8149 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:20:21 EST --- No error with 2.062 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8690] Can't access a global enum size_t from a pure function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8690 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Platform|x86 |All OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:28:05 EST --- While this probably should work, it's tricky to implement because semantic has to work out what foo is to find length, and that triggers the purity check _long_ before it works out length is constant. Workaround: use typeof(foo).length -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9107] Value Range Analysis with uint and byte
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9107 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:31:56 EST --- Range of a2 % 200: ( 0 to 200 ) Range of byte: ( -128 to 127 ) -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6654] Fixed-sized array length not accessible in pure functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6654 --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:34:55 EST --- *** Issue 8690 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 8690] Can't access a global enum size_t from a pure function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8690 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:34:55 EST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 6654 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8583] [64 bit] AA ushort[dchar] byValue range is corrupted on x86_64
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8583
Simon Harris pearfa...@googlemail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pearfa...@googlemail.com
--- Comment #4 from Simon Harris pearfa...@googlemail.com 2013-01-16 07:37:10
PST ---
Something interesting I found in rt/aaA.d, line 106: aligntsize() on 64-bit
compilation returns a value aligned to 16 bytes. _aaGetX uses this function on
key sizes when creating new elements. So for AAs whose key is = 8 bytes, the
value is still 16 bytes further on in memory.
You can check this by repeating the same alignment trick on the addresses of
byValue.front:
void testAAType(K, V)(V[K] aa)
{
writefln(testAAType with key %s, value %s, typeid(K), typeid(V));
for (auto v = aa.byValue; !v.empty; v.popFront()) { // emulated foreach (v
; aa.byValue)
V* fp = v.front();
writef(Unaligned: %s, *fp);
V* fpaligned = cast(V*) (( (cast(ptrdiff_t) fp) + 15) ~15); // copy
what aligntsize does on x64
version(D_LP64) {
writefln(; Aligned: %s, *fp.alignto16());
}
else {
writefln( (Not testing aligned value on a 32-bit executable));
}
}
}
Looking at the key sizes seems to match the pass/fail results in comment #2,
with one exception: ushort[uint[3]]. Not sure why the alignment trick is needed
here, given that uint[3].sizeof 8. Maybe DMD aligns
AssociativeArray!(uint[3], ushort).Slot to 4 bytes to save space, and since
_aaGetX uses a completely different type set, alignment info gets lost
somewhere.
Tested with DMD 2.060 and 2.061 on OS X 10.8.2.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7226] Refused pure nothrow ctor syntax
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7226 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:37:10 EST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 6677 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6677] static this attributes position
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6677 --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 02:37:10 EST --- *** Issue 7226 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 9326] writeln to simply show pointed data
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9326 --- Comment #7 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 09:54:23 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) What Kenji did was a better printing for ranges in general that is far more powerful (and better integrated) then arrays. Kenji (with help from others) has done many things on the writeln, like improving string printing, improving array printing, significantly improving associative array printing (maybe introducing xformat too). And I think he has added the printing for lazy ranges. He has also improved or added the printing of struct literals, improved the output in presence of const/immutable, improved the function literals, and other important details. It's good that you answered it already: not everybody needs it yet it requires more complex code to be pulled in for everybody. That's mostly true for every improvement listed above. There is also printf/puts. Dynamic languages doesn't ever consider cost-to-benefit ratio it seems. considering how much common they are (and they are becoming) it seems a good deal. (But they usually don't have chains of raw pointers). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6408] string[].init gives a wrong type
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6408 --- Comment #7 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 09:58:21 PST --- (In reply to comment #6) I'm not sure T* can be done like this, but it also produces an error instead of being ignored silently. Thank you. In the unittests have you added a test case that shows such error message? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5038] Change class 'invariant' syntax to emulate 'unittest'
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5038 --- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 10:01:17 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) The parentheses are necessary, because without them invariant is a deprecated alias for immutable. Eventually that alternative meaning will go away, so invariant for structs/class instances will be free to drop the useless (). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7570] Missing error in ctfe for dereferencing a pointer passed as a parameter
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7570 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|diagnostic | --- Comment #4 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 10:08:45 PST --- I remove the diagnostic tag because the diagnostic now seems acceptable. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8100] [ICE] with templated subclassing
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8100 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-01-16 10:11:55 PST --- Now it gives: temp.d(1): Error: no property 'Q' for type 'temp.Bar!(bool).Bar' temp.d(1): Error: T1.Q is used as a type temp.d(2): Error: template instance temp.Foo!(Bar) error instantiating temp.d(3):instantiated from here: Bar!(bool) temp.d(3): Error: template instance temp.Bar!(bool) error instantiating Closed. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9327] New: alias this declaration and unknown identifiers lead to segmentation fault
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9327
Summary: alias this declaration and unknown identifiers lead to
segmentation fault
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: tvwhit...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from tvwhit...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 11:04:18 PST ---
If two classes alias this each other and their is an unknown identifier DMD
will fail with segmentation fault: 11. This is on DMD 2.061, Mac OS X 10.8.2.
Example:
class foo {
bar fun;
alias fun this;
this() {
fun = new bar(this);
fun.a = 5; //remove this line and the program will compile.
}
}
class bar {
foo sun;
alias sun this;
this(foo t) {
sun = t;
}
}
void main() {
foo fun = new foo;
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9195] Should not be able to index a pointer in safed
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9195 --- Comment #8 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-01-16 11:50:29 PST --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/3d5b45196c687b714928954b027ef2944ca0beac Fix Issue 9195 - Should not be able to index a pointer in safed Allow pointer arithmetic when using an offset that is known to be zero https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/381bddf74ba9ddbd298491c182cc58043958f455 Merge pull request #1492 from yebblies/issue9195 Fix Issue 9195 - Should not be able to index a pointer in safed -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5461] Invalid declaration for auto functions in .di files generated by DMD -H
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5461 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Platform|Other |All Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #6 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2013-01-16 14:59:22 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1487 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1427] Generated .di files look ugly and are hard to read
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1427 --- Comment #4 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2013-01-16 14:59:56 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1487 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9328] New: Use advice from Google PageSpeed Insights
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9328 Summary: Use advice from Google PageSpeed Insights Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: websites AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: peter.alexander...@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 15:59:34 PST --- Google has a tool for analyzing website performance. It gives advice that can be used to make sure pages load as fast as possible, and to minimize bandwidth. Following this advice would improve the user experience. Here is what it shows for dlang.org https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights#url=dlang.orgmobile=false Highlights: Compressing the following resources with gzip could reduce their transfer size by 157.5KiB (67% reduction). Compressing http://dlang.org/js/codemirror.js could save 82.5KiB (73% reduction). Compressing http://dlang.org/js/hyphenate.js could save 32.6KiB (55% reduction). Compressing http://dlang.org/ could save 13.2KiB (68% reduction). Compressing http://dlang.org/js/run.js could save 11.8KiB (73% reduction). Compressing http://dlang.org/css/style.css could save 9.9KiB (73% reduction). Compressing http://dlang.org/js/d.js could save 4.1KiB (68% reduction). Compressing http://dlang.org/css/codemirror.css could save 3KiB (66% reduction). Compressing http://dlang.org/js/run-main-website.js could save 319B (41% reduction). The following cacheable resources have a short freshness lifetime. Specify an expiration at least one week in the future for the following resources: http://dlang.org/css/codemirror.css (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/css/print.css (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/css/style.css (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/images/dlogo.png (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/images/gradient-red.jpg (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/images/search-bg.gif (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/images/search-button.gif (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/images/search-left.gif (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/js/codemirror.js (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/js/d.js (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/js/hyphenate.js (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/js/run-main-website.js (expiration not specified) http://dlang.org/js/run.js (expiration not specified) Minifying the following JavaScript resources could reduce their size by 46.2KiB (18% reduction). Minifying http://dlang.org/js/codemirror.js could save 36.8KiB (33% reduction). Minifying http://dlang.org/js/run.js could save 4.7KiB (30% reduction). Minifying http://dlang.org/js/hyphenate.js could save 2.7KiB (5% reduction). Minifying http://dlang.org/js/d.js could save 1.4KiB (24% reduction). Minifying http://translate.googleapis.com/.../element_main.js could save 512B (1% reduction) after compression. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6408] string[].init gives a wrong type
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6408 --- Comment #8 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 11:35:14 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) (In reply to comment #6) I'm not sure T* can be done like this, but it also produces an error instead of being ignored silently. Thank you. In the unittests have you added a test case that shows such error message? For: auto x = string*.init; You get: testx.d(3): Error: undefined identifier 'init' Because it is parsed as (string) * (.init). To me it is much more clear that string*.init is invalid code compared to string[].init. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5038] Allow declaring class invariant without parentheses
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5038 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Platform|Other |All Resolution|DUPLICATE | Summary|Change class 'invariant'|Allow declaring class |syntax to emulate |invariant without |'unittest' |parentheses OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #4 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 11:41:39 EST --- Fair enough. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5038] Allow declaring class invariant without parentheses
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5038 Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 16:46:22 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) Fair enough. The deprecation page lists it as deprecated since 2.057, but the Error and Gone dates are empty. I'm not sure what the plan is, but I doubt there's any *compilable* D2 code out there that actually uses invariant instead of immutable. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5038] Allow declaring class invariant without parentheses
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5038 --- Comment #6 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 11:55:15 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) The deprecation page lists it as deprecated since 2.057, but the Error and Gone dates are empty. I'm not sure what the plan is, but I doubt there's any *compilable* D2 code out there that actually uses invariant instead of immutable. The general idea is to leave at least six months between deprecation stages. The version numbers are missing because there is no fixed release schedule, and no guarantee the change would be pulled in time to match any projected date. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5529] std.system.endian for pure functions?
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5529 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 12:33:40 EST --- Fixed a while ago https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/57249b4378280e67b2a66be28f939c86a0dee78a -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5541] Disallow escaping of references to stack-allocated memory
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5541 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #3 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 12:36:55 EST --- None of this compiles any more with 2.062 head -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9329] New: unexpected 'int' in error message
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9329
Summary: unexpected 'int' in error message
Product: D
Version: D1 D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: minor
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: kekeni...@yahoo.co.jp
--- Comment #0 from kekeni...@yahoo.co.jp 2013-01-16 17:47:30 PST ---
This problem is a trivial unless it causes any other worse.
class Dummy {
invariant() const { } // wrong 'const'
}
This code gets some error messages,
including an unexpected one: Error: no identifier for declarator int.
Where 'int' comes from?
It shows that an uninitialized value is exposed, I suspect.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9325] writeln of const class instance
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9325 Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com Platform|x86 |All OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #1 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 17:56:16 PST --- The platform fields are not relevant unless it's a platform-specific problem. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8345] Odd error for using 08 literal
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8345 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 13:13:11 EST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 6033 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5943] Power expression optimisation: 2^^unsigned == 1unsigned
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5943 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull CC||yebbl...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@puremagic.com|yebbl...@gmail.com OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 13:11:23 EST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1498 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6033] Better error message with numbers with leading zeros
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6033 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 13:13:12 EST --- *** Issue 8345 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 6528] Private module functions optimizations
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6528 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 13:36:39 EST --- The first case here is already done by the linker. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7034] Infinite foreach on array
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7034 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 13:54:13 EST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5725 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5725] ubyte/ushort infinite foreach loops
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5725 --- Comment #2 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 13:54:13 EST --- *** Issue 7034 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 8293] Small amount of static analysis to avoid certain destructor bugs
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8293 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 13:59:22 EST --- The problem is that using the gc in a destructor is perfectly valid for two reasons: - InvalidMemoryOperationError is just an implementation deficiency - You can manually call the destructor The first reason will go away eventually. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 7840] $ property for arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7840 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 13:56:38 EST --- I would consider this a bad idea, but that's just me. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 8964] One infinite loop with foreach
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8964 yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 14:02:25 EST --- Again! *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5725 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5725] ubyte/ushort infinite foreach loops
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5725 --- Comment #3 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 14:02:25 EST --- *** Issue 8964 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 3632] modify float is float to do a bitwise compare
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3632 --- Comment #28 from yebblies yebbl...@gmail.com 2013-01-17 16:08:29 EST --- New (and hopefully last) pull https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1499 -- 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 Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@dawg.eu --- Comment #5 from Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu 2013-01-16 21:26:47 PST --- *** Issue 6600 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 6600] unrelated expression alters function name mangling
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6600 Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu 2013-01-16 21:26:47 PST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 6902 *** -- 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 #6 from Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu 2013-01-16 21:28:49 PST ---
cat bug.d CODE
void a()
{
function void() { }();
}
void b()
{
static void safe_nothrow() @safe nothrow pure { }
auto f = safe_nothrow;
enum mangle = typeof(*f).mangleof;
static assert(mangle == FNaNbNfZv, mangle);
}
CODE
dmd -c bug
I've actually found a new failing test case for this.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3796] Result of .stringof is affected by unrelated function declarations
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3796 Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||c...@dawg.eu Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #5 from Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu 2013-01-16 21:39:05 PST --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 6902 *** -- 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 #7 from Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu 2013-01-16 21:39:05 PST --- *** Issue 3796 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 9330] New: Cannot run dmd test suite with MSYS
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9330 Summary: Cannot run dmd test suite with MSYS Product: D Version: unspecified Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: k.hara...@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 21:44:49 PST --- DMD fails to invoke LINK.EXE for the build of `d_do_test.d`. config file (C:\Users\khara\sc.ini) : --- [Version] version=7.51 Build 020 [Environment] LIB=%HOME%\dmd2\windows\lib;%HOME%\dm\lib DFLAGS=-I%HOME%\dmd2\src\phobos -I%HOME%\dmd2\src\druntime\import LINKCMD=%HOME%\dmd2\windows\bin\link.exe --- environment variables: --- echo %HOME% C:\Users\khara command lines and outputs: --- cd C:\Users\khara\dmd2\src\dmd\test # move to test directory C:\MinGW\msys\1.0\bin\make # run makefile with GNU make in MSYS Creating output directory: test_results Building d_do_test tool OS: win32 OPTLINK (R) for Win32 Release 8.00.12 Copyright (C) Digital Mars 1989-2010 All rights reserved. http://www.digitalmars.com/ctg/optlink.html OPTLINK : Warning 9: Unknown Option : KHARA\DMD2\WINDOWS\BIN\LINK.EXE Users.obj Error 2: File Not Found Users.obj --- errorlevel 1 make: *** [test_results/d_do_test] Error 1 That is a specific problem for the MSYS environment. With cygwin environment, the problem does not occur. When dmd invoked from MSYS make, getenv(HOME) returns C:/Users/khara instead of C:\Users\khara (note that the path separator difference). MinGW bug tracker report: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=102435aid=1100932group_id=2435 When reading sc.ini, DMD will try to expanding %HOME% environment variable for LINKCMD, but it is expanded to C:/Users/khara\dmd2\windows\bin\link.exe under the MSYS, then dmd fails to invoke link command which has the mixtured path separators. From the MSYS source code, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, TMPDIR, TMP, and TEMP have same issue. http://mingw.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=mingw/msys-runtime;a=blob;f=winsup/cygwin/environ.cc;h=b88ca3d39d8d77a4d38be3fcd09e2fa8bbd0c265;hb=77f2469b25911ceebae6741cbd2fa1b0ff6b1d6e#l61 So, this is not actually the bug of DMD, but I think we should add a workaround to support development with MSYS. To resolve the problem, DMD should normalize path separator on the link command invocation. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9330] Cannot run dmd test suite with MSYS
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9330 Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull --- Comment #1 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2013-01-16 21:54:18 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1500 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9331] New: incorrect ulong.max value
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9331
Summary: incorrect ulong.max value
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: g.sa...@yahoo.es
--- Comment #0 from Jordi Sayol g.sa...@yahoo.es 2013-01-16 23:52:53 PST ---
When compiling this code to 64-bit.
app.d
import std.stdio;
void main()
{
ubyte u1 = cast(byte)-1;
byte u2 = cast(short)-1;
uint u3 = cast(int)-1;
int u4 = cast(long)-1;
writefln(%d, u1);
writefln(%d, u2);
writefln(%d, u3);
writefln(%d\n, u4);
writefln(long.sizeof: %d ulong.max: %20d, ulong.sizeof, ulong.max);
writefln(long.sizeof: %d long max: %20d, long.sizeof, long.max);
}
Prints this:
255
-1
4294967295
-1
long.sizeof: 8 ulong.max: 4294967295
long.sizeof: 8 long max: 9223372036854775807
ulong.max value is incorrect
Tested with dmd version 2.056, 2.057, 2.058, 2.059, 2.060 and 2.061
No problem when compiling to 32-bit.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
