[Issue 4820] Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

[via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4820

Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Version|D1  D2 |D2

--

[Issue 4820] Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4820



--- Comment #4 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-03-02 21:28:41 PST ---
Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/06e98272f690cf79444b797d2de021ee7eb4a186
fix Issue 4820 - Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 4820] Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4820



--- Comment #5 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-03-02 22:19:06 PST ---
Commit pushed to dmd-1.x at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/415e48ac4703ffab94cd6ce5a3211625099c637a
fix Issue 4820 - Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 4820] Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4820


Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com
 Resolution||FIXED


-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 4820] Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4820


Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fa...@gmx.ch


--- Comment #2 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-09-13 23:57:27 PDT ---
*** Issue 4304 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 4820] Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4820


Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends on||4440


--- Comment #3 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-09-14 00:02:29 PDT ---
Although this particular case used to work, it was very fragile.
Calling nextis() directly from main() never worked.
This whole feature probably won't correctly until delegate literals can be
inlined.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 4820] Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4820


Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
Summary|Regressions in DStress  |Regression(1.058, 2.044) in
   |caused by changeset 452 |DStress caused by changeset
   ||452
   Severity|normal  |regression


-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 4820] Regression(1.058, 2.044) in DStress caused by changeset 452

[d-bugmail]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4820



--- Comment #1 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-09-06 00:44:52 PDT ---
Thanks for the superb bug report!
Reduced test case shows it's nothing to do with lazy:

void nextis(void delegate() dg = {}) {}

void main() {
nextis();
}

This is failing because function/delegate literals cannot be inlined. Prior to
svn 452, that wasn't being checked in the special case where they were default
parameters. Until bug 2935 was fixed, default values were created in the same
scope as the function declaration. That was a disaster for structs, but might
be OK for function literals -- not sure. Here's an example which used to
compile, but now fails, which never used global scope.

void main() {
   int x = 27;
   int nextis(int delegate() dg = { return x; }) { return dg(); }
   ++x;
   assert(nextis() == 28);
}

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---