[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 Andrei Alexandrescu changed: What|Removed |Added Version|2.030 |D2 --
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 --- Comment #9 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2014-01-24 11:19:09 PST --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/24ae9f83b94227f758ae5b367b355ab309421e72 Remove 'awful hack' introduced when fixing issue 3029 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/533149070309231924cee30ddf1899151a097332 Merge pull request #3134 from yebblies/issue3029 Remove 'awful hack' introduced when fixing issue 3029 -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from yebblies 2012-02-22 02:18:23 EST --- What happened here? Are we really maintaining backwards compatibility in only the cases that _weren't_ buggy? What legacy compiled code base is this supposed to be supporting? I seriously doubt anyone expects to be able to use a new version of dmd without recompiling their code at this point. See expression.c:2128 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #7 from Walter Bright 2010-03-08 22:19:22 PST --- Fixed dmd 1.057 and 2.041 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 Kosmonaut changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kosmon...@tempinbox.com --- Comment #6 from Kosmonaut 2010-02-05 23:41:50 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) > changeset 370 http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmd/changeset/370 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 --- Comment #5 from Don 2010-02-05 22:09:00 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) > Why keep the backwards compatibility in D2? Yes. With things like the recent change to ModuleInfo, you can't even update the compiler one revision without recompiling. So I don't think we have to worry about D2 backwards compatibility for the next month (which is why it's crucial to get these types of bugs fixed now). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 Brad Roberts changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bra...@puremagic.com --- Comment #4 from Brad Roberts 2010-02-05 19:33:46 PST --- Why keep the backwards compatibility in D2? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #3 from Walter Bright 2010-02-05 19:27:30 PST --- changeset 370 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 --- Comment #2 from Shin Fujishiro 2009-06-06 09:07:02 PDT --- Another (possibly better) option is to fix the numeric literal mangling rule as this: Value: i Number// positive numeric literal i N Number // negative numeric literal The prefix 'i' avoids the mangled-name collision. And this rule is consistent with other literal mangling rules, which are prefixed by some character (e.g. 'e' for floating point literals). Patch (expression.c): void IntegerExp::toMangleBuffer(OutBuffer *buf) { if ((sinteger_t)value < 0) -buf->printf("N%jd", -value); +buf->printf("iN%jd", -value); else -buf->printf("%jd", value); +buf->printf("i%jd", value); } -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3029] Bug in array value mangling rule
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3029 --- Comment #1 from Shin Fujishiro 2009-05-27 05:54:04 PDT --- Struct literals and associative array literals have the same bug too. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---