[Issue 8037] hasElaborateDestructor is false for non-zero-length static array of structs with elaborate destructor

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8037 Kenji Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #61 from Stewart Gordon 2012-05-07 03:58:47 PDT --- (In reply to comment #58) > It's not that simple. Several considerations have to be met: > > 1. Because of struct construction/destruction, you really only > want to construct t

[Issue 8056] Properties should behave like variables, e.g. compound assignments

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8056 Stewart Gordon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 8006] Implement proper in-place-modification for properties

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8006 Stewart Gordon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wfunct...@hotmail.com --- Comment #1

[Issue 8059] Deprecate .classinfo

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8059 --- Comment #1 from Steven Schveighoffer 2012-05-07 04:38:39 PDT --- See also issue 3346 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 8059] New: Deprecate .classinfo

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8059 Summary: Deprecate .classinfo Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P2 Component: DMD Assigned

[Issue 8059] Deprecate .classinfo

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8059 Alex R�nne Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xtzgzo...@gmail.com --- Comment

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #62 from deadalnix 2012-05-07 04:43:25 PDT --- (In reply to comment #60) > This has been some significant pwning of Walter and myself, and I think there > is a larger lesson here we should learn. > Quoting yourself � Mistakes happ

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #63 from Walter Bright 2012-05-07 08:29:21 PDT --- (In reply to comment #61) > (In reply to comment #58) > > It's not that simple. Several considerations have to be met: > > > > 1. Because of struct construction/destruction, you

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #64 from deadalnix 2012-05-07 09:00:05 PDT --- (In reply to comment #63) > Again, you're pushing the parameters on the stack twice - and this won't work > for variadic functions. Why not jump in the function directly after the pro

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #65 from Walter Bright 2012-05-07 09:36:56 PDT --- (In reply to comment #64) > Why not jump in the function directly after the prolog and not push arguments > twice on the stack ? Not so easy given how back ends are designed. --

[Issue 8039] `scoped` doesn't call any elaborate destructors for struct fields

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8039 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 09:37:42 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/273eb2122665312011b8bb9bd21e9c85a

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #66 from Stewart Gordon 2012-05-07 10:32:33 PDT --- (In reply to comment #63) > > Can't this be solved by simply making all struct parameters to the in/out > > functions ref? > > Losing all C ABI compatiblity in the process. Contr

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #67 from Stewart Gordon 2012-05-07 10:48:26 PDT --- (In reply to comment #62) > Changing how the language work must be done only if strong arguments are made. Unless I've missed something, the language leaves this unspecified. So

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #68 from Walter Bright 2012-05-07 12:17:19 PDT --- (In reply to comment #66) > (In reply to comment #63) > > > Can't this be solved by simply making all struct parameters to the in/out > > > functions ref? > > > > Losing all C ABI

[Issue 6857] Precondition contract checks should be statically bound.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6857 --- Comment #69 from Stewart Gordon 2012-05-07 12:26:47 PDT --- (In reply to comment #68) > 1. pass by ref is semantically very different from pass by value. It is > necessary to support both. The function that implements a contract is an inte

[Issue 64] Unhandled errors should go to stderr

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=64 --- Comment #7 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 12:29:27 PDT --- Commit pushed to dmd-1.x at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/246f737c0f246f0b89ee27bfb611965e64f611ac

[Issue 64] Unhandled errors should go to stderr

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=64 --- Comment #8 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 12:29:41 PDT --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/f1039b341f2798f176dcf3c34019682d413ea863 s

[Issue 5570] 64 bit C ABI not followed for passing structs and complex numbers as function parameters

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5570 --- Comment #15 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 12:29:35 PDT --- Commit pushed to dmd-1.x at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/246f737c0f246f0b89ee27bfb611965e64f611

[Issue 5570] 64 bit C ABI not followed for passing structs and complex numbers as function parameters

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5570 --- Comment #15 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 12:29:35 PDT --- Commit pushed to dmd-1.x at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/246f737c0f246f0b89ee27bfb611965e64f611

[Issue 5570] 64 bit C ABI not followed for passing structs and complex numbers as function parameters

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5570 --- Comment #17 from Johan Hernandez 2012-05-07 12:40:48 PDT --- I'm very happy to see some commits on this issue, this is really important!!! Walter++!!! -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ---

[Issue 8060] New: xmmstore cannot allocate store for optimized operation that uses int and floats

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8060 Summary: xmmstore cannot allocate store for optimized operation that uses int and floats Product: D Version: D1 & D2 Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW

[Issue 8060] xmmstore cannot allocate store for optimized operation that uses int and floats

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8060 --- Comment #1 from Fawzi Mohamed 2012-05-07 13:54:15 PDT --- well probably the optimizer should not expect such a thing to be possible. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving t

[Issue 7832] opAssign does not get used for function parameters with a default value

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7832 William Moore changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 8061] New: std.algorithm.joiner breaks when used with InputRangeObject

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8061 Summary: std.algorithm.joiner breaks when used with InputRangeObject Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

[Issue 6199] [GSoC] Postblit not called when returning a reference to a by-value function.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6199 --- Comment #4 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 18:10:39 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/9c03f1445966163321cf40456f35f83f534f2b1

[Issue 5737] postblit not called for locals initialized from ref functions

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5737 --- Comment #4 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 18:10:45 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/70cbf1b9fb947a7abe920836e0b5746a39254ac

[Issue 5737] postblit not called for locals initialized from ref functions

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5737 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 6199] [GSoC] Postblit not called when returning a reference to a by-value function.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6199 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 6470] postblits not called on arrays of structs

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6470 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 19:43:20 PDT --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/26aacf0b510d59f572122a55a9a74c071aab889c

[Issue 3703] static array assignment

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3703 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 19:43:15 PDT --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/6dfdd2dd1552dfb9b66a35ab65afdcfe30630c0e

[Issue 6636] Destructors of static array elements are not called on function parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6636 --- Comment #3 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 19:43:26 PDT --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/57d7f41f82bac4efd05053b5ae23642b65ad18aa

[Issue 6637] Postblits of static array elements are not called on function argument

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6637 --- Comment #3 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 19:43:30 PDT --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/2f09427e321e1587fdebc983f25f8b4c78cd5f0d

[Issue 4744] std.conv: string->enum doesn't look for longer match

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4744 --- Comment #3 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-05-07 20:39:52 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/07d34c1ae0b5283cf5bc22610d4401443

[Issue 3703] static array assignment

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3703 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 6470] postblits not called on arrays of structs

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6470 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 6636] Destructors of static array elements are not called on function parameter

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6636 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 6637] Postblits of static array elements are not called on function argument

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6637 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|