Re: OPTLINK : Error 118: Filename Expected

2012-08-10 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/9/2012 8:23 PM, anon wrote: On Thursday, 9 August 2012 at 00:35:37 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/8/2012 4:11 PM, anon wrote: Yet another obscure error message that makes no sense. I suspect it's the ( ) you have in the file names. I suspect you ought to fix your linker. "Program Files

[Issue 8530] New: Float types default initializers doesn't work in class

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8530 Summary: Float types default initializers doesn't work in class Product: D Version: D2 Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P2

Re: [Issue 8530] New: Float types default initializers doesn't work in class

2012-08-10 Thread Daniel Kozak
On Friday, 10 August 2012 at 09:27:25 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8530 Summary: Float types default initializers doesn't work in class Product: D Version: D2 Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Linux

[Issue 8530] Float types default initializers doesn't work in class

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8530 Jonathan M Davis changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #1

[Issue 8530] Float types default initializers doesn't work in class

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8530 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Kozak 2012-08-10 03:19:42 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > If you want to check for NaN, then use std.math.isNaN. As I understand it, > there is no guarantee that two NaN values have the same bit pattern (at > minim

[Issue 8531] New: formatting string documentation

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8531 Summary: formatting string documentation Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Phobos

[Issue 8532] New: Pure Segfault

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8532 Summary: Pure Segfault Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: no

Re: OPTLINK : Error 118: Filename Expected

2012-08-10 Thread anon
On Friday, 10 August 2012 at 08:02:59 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/9/2012 8:23 PM, anon wrote: On Thursday, 9 August 2012 at 00:35:37 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/8/2012 4:11 PM, anon wrote: Yet another obscure error message that makes no sense. I suspect it's the ( ) you have in the fil

[Issue 8533] New: Postfix and prefix declarations of static multidimensional arrays aren't equivalent

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8533 Summary: Postfix and prefix declarations of static multidimensional arrays aren't equivalent Product: D Version: D2 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW

[Issue 8533] Postfix and prefix declarations of static multidimensional arrays aren't equivalent

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8533 timon.g...@gmx.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 8533] Postfix and prefix declarations of static multidimensional arrays aren't equivalent

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8533 --- Comment #2 from fataler...@trash-mail.com 2012-08-10 11:30:16 PDT --- Oh, yes it was an oversight on my side, sorry. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because:

Re: [Issue 8530] New: Float types default initializers doesn't work in class

2012-08-10 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/10/2012 2:30 AM, Daniel Kozak wrote: Problematic code: Replying to bug reports in the newsgroup generally means your reply will be overlooked. Please reply on bugzilla.

[Issue 8534] New: mixed-in struct definition not forward referenceable

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8534 Summary: mixed-in struct definition not forward referenceable Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2

[Issue 8535] New: perfectly valid uncidoe chars give: "Unsupported char xxx"

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8535 Summary: perfectly valid uncidoe chars give: "Unsupported char xxx" Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

[Issue 8535] perfectly valid uncidoe chars give: "Unsupported char xxx"

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8535 --- Comment #1 from Dmitry Olshansky 2012-08-10 14:20:05 PDT --- Created an attachment (id=1137) tables with "wrong" chars -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail beca

[Issue 8535] perfectly valid uncidoe chars give: "Unsupported char xxx"

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8535 Dmitry Olshansky changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 8536] New: OPTLINK crash with large fixed-size array

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8536 Summary: OPTLINK crash with large fixed-size array Product: D Version: D2 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2

[Issue 8536] OPTLINK crash with large fixed-size array

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8536 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #

[Issue 8536] OPTLINK crash with large fixed-size array

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8536 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2012-08-10 19:43:48 PDT --- Created an attachment (id=1138) Three C programs that show one effect of static 2D arrays -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email

[Issue 8536] OPTLINK crash with large fixed-size array

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8536 --- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2012-08-10 19:49:18 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > This is a well known Optlink bug, though I don't have the bugzilla number > handy. OK. > You're wrong about it impeding optimizations compared w

[Issue 481] Letting compiler determine length for fixed-length arrays

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=481 --- Comment #14 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2012-08-10 20:03:23 PDT --- A bug I've just found. Originally I was using 20 points, and I needed them in a fixed-size array. Later I have removed some of them to reduce the testing time, but I have for

[Issue 8536] OPTLINK crash with large fixed-size array

2012-08-10 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8536 --- Comment #4 from Walter Bright 2012-08-10 20:51:43 PDT --- Your test is incorrectly written. Use one array, not an array of arrays, and use a macro to compute the r*row+c index. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userp