On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 11:54:38 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 10:43:01 UTC, wjoe wrote:
Could you elaborate on ```version(assert)``` a bit more,
please ? Like I compiled with ```-release, -g``` and without
the 2 options but the ```assert``` branch was always
On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 11:01:56 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 09:18:08 UTC, wjoe wrote:
If it's to be determined whether or not the code is being
compiled in debug or release mode, i.e. e.g. the dmd
```-release```
You should never use the -release flag. It
On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 10:43:01 UTC, wjoe wrote:
Could you elaborate on ```version(assert)``` a bit more, please
? Like I compiled with ```-release, -g``` and without the 2
options but the ```assert``` branch was always taken. Could it
be that ```-unittest``` has something to do
On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 09:18:08 UTC, wjoe wrote:
If it's to be determined whether or not the code is being
compiled in debug or release mode, i.e. e.g. the dmd
```-release```
You should never use the -release flag. It should be renamed to
"-enable-security-holes" since that's what it
On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 10:08:12 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 09:18:08 UTC, wjoe wrote:
Given that we have `version(assert)` and
`version(D_NoBoundsChecks)`, it probably makes sense to also
have equivalents to test if contracts are enabled, or if bounds
checking
On Thursday, 5 August 2021 at 09:18:08 UTC, wjoe wrote:
If it's to be determined whether or not the code is being
compiled in debug or release mode, i.e. e.g. the dmd
```-release``` or ```-g``` options, which version identifier is
supposed to be used ?
There's no ```release``` identifier and
