Am Sun, 16 Jun 2013 02:15:18 +0100 schrieb Iain Buclaw <ibuc...@ubuntu.com>:
> On 16 June 2013 02:13, Iain Buclaw <ibuc...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > > On 16 June 2013 01:05, Adam D. Ruppe <destructiona...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> nvm, I figured it out. I didn't pass the right ABI version when > >> building runtime, so my fault. > >> > >> This is pretty exciting though, D is working and it wasn't really > >> *that* much effort! > > > > It's been a few years in the making. And there are still one or two > > things that need to be pushed upstream to the D front end. > > > > The last few months has been hugely beneficial for being > > architecture agnostic code generation. So every problem you > > encounter when targeting a new platform would hopefully be in > > relation to the druntime C interface, which if you have patches for > > please send my way. ;) > > > > > I would also invite you to run the test suite as well ( make check-d > ) and post all failed and unresolved tests as new bugs, where possible > providing minimal test cases that trigger the issue. > > > Thanks > -- > Iain Buclaw > > *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; I incidentally did that this weekend. Using a commit before the 2.063 merge I only get these failures: FAIL: runnable/arrayop.d execution test http://bugzilla.gdcproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8 FAIL: runnable/opover2.d execution test http://bugzilla.gdcproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10 FAIL: runnable/template1.d execution test FAIL: runnable/test4.d execution test (common 32 bit bug?)