On Monday, March 07, 2011 06:23:09 Stewart Gordon wrote: > On 07/03/2011 02:10, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > <snip> > > > If you're using -cov, you probably want -unittest, > > <snip> > > I disagree: > > - Most of the time I use -cov, it's to check the normal flow of program > logic, rather than the unittests. It's true that it *can* be used to > check that the unittests cover all cases, but that's far from its only > use. > > - Even if checking unittests were its only *practical* use, it would be > arbitrary to program in a restriction explicitly.
I believe that the _common_ use case for -cov is to check the coverage of your unit tests, in which case you'd also need to use -unittest (that's what is _normally_ meant when talking about code coverage). However, there's nothing stopping you from using it when running your program normally. > Moreover, does DMD have a Win64 (either runs on or compiles for) version? > Or is it just the normal Win32 version, running on your 64-bit system? It > would be useful if we could find out the circumstances in which this bug > bites. As far dmd itself goes, only a 32-bit binary exists, and Walter has no plans to create 64-bit version. In terms of compiling with dmd, Linux got 64-bit compilation (when you use -m64) with the latest release, but there are a number of things which will need to be sorted out before dmd will be able to compile 64-bit programs on Windows (including having a 64-bit linker). - Jonathan M Davis
