[Issue 6150] New: runnable/testsocket.d
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6150 Summary: runnable/testsocket.d Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: bra...@puremagic.com --- Comment #0 from Brad Roberts 2011-06-11 23:39:45 PDT --- If I'm reading the code right, this test depends on connect not failing during the connect and only later failing during the poll. It's not wrong for connect to fail immediately and not defer that to a poll, even with the socket set to non-blocking. I've seen it on linux and on freebsd/64 it seems to occur pretty frequently (roughly half the time). I'm tempted to just nuke the entire test. It's not a dmd test, it's a phobos test, and all that code is on the list of 'things that should be overhauled' anyway. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6148] Make templates smarter about instantiating with implicitly convertible arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6148 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan M Davis 2011-06-11 23:31:20 PDT --- Yeah. Bug# 5666 is related as well. Both bug# 4971 and bug# 5666 deal with specific instances where this enhancement would fix the problem. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6148] Make templates smarter about instantiating with implicitly convertible arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6148 kenn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kenn...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from kenn...@gmail.com 2011-06-11 23:23:31 PDT --- Bug 5666? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5258] [CTFE] Stack overflow with struct by ref
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5258 Don changed: What|Removed |Added CC||verylonglogin@gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Don 2011-06-11 22:33:41 PDT --- *** Issue 6131 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6131] [CTFE] Simple call of struct methods causes "Stack overflow" or hanging-up
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6131 Don changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Don 2011-06-11 22:33:41 PDT --- Already fixed in git master *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5258 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6001] CTFE: ICE(interpret.c) mutating array passed by ref
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6001 Don changed: What|Removed |Added CC||verylonglogin@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Don 2011-06-11 22:32:57 PDT --- *** Issue 6134 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6134] [CTFE] Assignment ref or out parameter to local variable fails
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6134 Don changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Don 2011-06-11 22:32:57 PDT --- Already fixed in git master. *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 6001 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6149] New: ICE(interpret.c) Assertion failure: 'v2 && v2->getValue()'
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6149
Summary: ICE(interpret.c) Assertion failure: 'v2 &&
v2->getValue()'
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Severity: regression
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: cbkbbej...@mailinator.com
--- Comment #0 from Nick Sabalausky 2011-06-11
20:18:09 PDT ---
This is a regression in DMD 2.053:
const a = "";
int foo()
{
const bar = a;
return 1;
}
enum b = foo();
Result
--
Assertion failure: 'v2 && v2->getValue()' on line 2615 in file 'interpret.c'
abnormal program termination
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2625] Creating new struct with literal bypasses immutability of members if struct is in array
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2625 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #10 from Walter Bright 2011-06-11 20:17:30 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/365297878c11039944be5d78d57909564bef70aa -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5327] Creating new struct with literal bypasses immutability of members of members of the struct
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5327 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Walter Bright 2011-06-11 20:17:15 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/365297878c11039944be5d78d57909564bef70aa -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4971] to!() fails with static arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4971 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan M Davis 2011-06-11 20:06:18 PDT --- Related: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6148 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6148] New: Make templates smarter about instantiating with implicitly convertible arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6148
Summary: Make templates smarter about instantiating with
implicitly convertible arrays
Product: D
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: jmdavisp...@gmx.com
--- Comment #0 from Jonathan M Davis 2011-06-11 20:05:35
PDT ---
At present, most of range-based algorithms fail with static arrays and const or
immutable dynamic arrays. This is because when a templated function attempts to
instantiate them, it uses their _exact_ type, when they can work just fine as
long as the appropriate dynamic array is used instead. For instance, find's
basic definition for looking for a range within another range looks like this:
R1 find(alias pred = "a == b", R1, R2)(R1 haystack, R2 needle)
if (isForwardRange!R1 && isForwardRange!R2
&& is(typeof(binaryFun!pred(haystack.front, needle.front)) : bool)
&& !isRandomAccessRange!R1)
{...}
static arrays and const or immutable dynamic arrays will fail because they
aren't input ranges. However, if find had a special overload for arrays such as
R1 find(alias pred = "a == b", R1, E)(R1 haystack, const(E)[] needle)
if (isForwardRange!R1
&& is(typeof(binaryFun!pred(haystack.front, needle.front)) : bool)
&& !isRandomAccessRange!R1)
{...}
then static arrays and const or immutable dynamic arrays would work, because
they would implicitly convert to a dynamic array of const elements of the same
type of element that they have. And in fact, as long as the static array isn't
const or immutable, it would convert to a mutable dynamic array of the same
element type. I would _very_ much like to see the compiler be smart enough to
instatiate templates with such dynamic arrays when given static arrays or const
or immutable dynamic arrays which would otherwise fail.
I don't know what the best way to handle this is given that templates always
instantiate with their exact type at this point, and there _might_ be a case
where you'd actually _want_ to instantiate one with a static array or an
immutable or const dynamic array. If it's a problem to disallow static arrays
and const or immutable arrays as the type that a template instantiates with
(since they'd be converted over to the most mutable dynamic array which they
could implicitly convert to), then perhaps the solution is to make a second
pass through the template instantiation if it fails with a static array or a
const or immutable dynamic array and try it with the most mutable array type
which they can be implicitly converted to. And then if _that_ works,
instantiate it with that type.
Regardless, it would be _highly_ desirable to make it possible for static
arrays and const or immutable dynamic arrays to instantiate templates with the
most mutable type of array that they will implicitly convert to. Otherwise, the
only way to get around the problem is either to overload every range function
explicitly for arrays or to print template error messages when someone
accidentally uses a static array or a const or immutable dynamic array. Neither
of those scenarios is particularly pleasant. These types of arrays _should_
work, but because templates are currently always so exact, even when they don't
need to be, they don't work. So, please make it possible for them to
instantiate the templates appropriately
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6148] Make templates smarter about instantiating with implicitly convertible arrays
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6148 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan M Davis 2011-06-11 20:06:08 PDT --- Related: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4971 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6145] Meaningless second error message for complex size of static array
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6145 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Walter Bright 2011-06-11 18:08:57 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/0af1eb8c4a567b3c3eee1c7c7d8b612e9f58f386 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/1157ccbea6527a3cf5265794771af0b3ee019db5 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4745] Non-uniform handling of commas in static initialization of structs
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4745 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4745] Non-uniform handling of commas in static initialization of structs
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4745 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #3 from Walter Bright 2011-06-11 16:38:18 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/b6b60755753bd237650dd2ae8e1190d103854475 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/b937e5729419f99ec1b0631c268fc9fbe6b42cc3 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6121] Can't link with DMC C++ generated functions with long arguments
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6121 --- Comment #2 from Andrej Mitrovic 2011-06-11 15:50:12 PDT --- Right, c_long is an alias to int on Windows. It still won't link, but a comment in another thread might lead me to believe that this is just a name-mangling problem. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6121] Can't link with DMC C++ generated functions with long arguments
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6121 Jonathan M Davis changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #1 from Jonathan M Davis 2011-06-11 15:30:54 PDT --- I believe that that's why druntime uses the alias c_long. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1567] call to private super-constructor should not be allowed
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1567 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies 2011-06-11 14:44:53 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/113 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2180] filename error with #line
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2180 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #5 from Walter Bright 2011-06-11 14:23:23 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/e406580bd92179801a9eec03690fd7d0806c6c4c -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5861] Wrong filename in error message when an invalid delegate in a template parameter is typeof()-ed
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5861 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Walter Bright 2011-06-11 14:21:10 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/750f96853c8885ca7c95e97485cacb94205b7190 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4661] Array Literal Incompatible Type Error Msg Should Include Line Number
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4661 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #10 from Walter Bright 2011-06-11 12:50:14 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/86ea84f72c3b82ae034776e58a96054ab97f2138 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3194] invariant should be checked at the beginning and end of protected functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3194 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies 2011-06-11 12:10:59 PDT --- Patch for D2 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/112 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 991] void static array: integral constant must be scalar type, not void
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=991 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #3 from yebblies 2011-06-11 10:43:50 PDT --- This works in dmd 1.068 and dmd 2.053, if you use a void initializer. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2095] covariance w/o typechecks = bugs
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2095 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #31 from yebblies 2011-06-11 09:57:42 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/110 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3960] Unused local variables not reported
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3960 --- Comment #16 from yebblies 2011-06-11 08:38:50 PDT --- (In reply to comment #15) > (In reply to comment #14) > > I'm still fairly sure I've seen Walter say no to this request somewhere. > > If I > > can find it I'll change the report to spec/enhancement. > > This isn't an enhancement. That the compiler doesn't behave according to the > spec is an outright bug. > > It might be a case of removing the statement from the spec. But > - it won't stop people wanting the compiler to warn of an unused local > variable, so this would remain valid albeit as an enhancement request > - any clue of why Walter may have changed his mind about this? All I can find is http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/Unused_variables_better_as_error_or_warning_115751.html#N115794 and http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/c++/command-line/282.html (from 2003!) If the spec is wrong, then this _is_ a valid enhancement _and_ a valid spec bug. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6147] New: file scheme uri from file path and vice versa
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6147 Summary: file scheme uri from file path and vice versa Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: trivial Priority: P2 Component: Phobos AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: alienballa...@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Mariusz Gliwiński 2011-06-11 08:29:31 PDT --- It would be useful to have it built in with phobos. I believe it's quite common and generic pattern, so people wouldn't have to inverse slashes conditionally on windows (+glue of course). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3960] Unused local variables not reported
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3960 --- Comment #15 from Stewart Gordon 2011-06-11 08:21:48 PDT --- (In reply to comment #14) > I'm still fairly sure I've seen Walter say no to this request somewhere. If I > can find it I'll change the report to spec/enhancement. This isn't an enhancement. That the compiler doesn't behave according to the spec is an outright bug. It might be a case of removing the statement from the spec. But - it won't stop people wanting the compiler to warn of an unused local variable, so this would remain valid albeit as an enhancement request - any clue of why Walter may have changed his mind about this? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3960] Unused local variables not reported
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3960 --- Comment #14 from yebblies 2011-06-11 07:38:51 PDT --- (In reply to comment #13) > (In reply to comment #11) > > It actually seems more likely that this is a bug in the spec, as I think > > Walter > > is against pretty much anything that requires flow analysis. > > What has this issue to do with flow analysis? You're right! I'm still fairly sure I've seen Walter say no to this request somewhere. If I can find it I'll change the report to spec/enhancement. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5088] Cannot cast const(int) to long in @safe function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5088 --- Comment #4 from yebblies 2011-06-11 07:37:11 PDT --- New pull request: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/109 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5415] @Safe functions not working
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5415 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid, patch CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies 2011-06-11 07:36:56 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/109 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4885] Uninitialize Pointers Allowed in @safe code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4885 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies 2011-06-11 07:36:31 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/109 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4132] pointer arithmetic accepted in @safe functions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4132 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC||yebbl...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from yebblies 2011-06-11 07:36:19 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/109 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6100] [CTFE] regression: struct return values wrong if used in array initializer
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6100 Don changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Don 2011-06-11 06:44:55 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/5aac13c31c86fb11465e5a3b52775e850d8b193d -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5615] std.string.indexOf broken at compile time
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5615 Don changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Don 2011-06-11 06:41:11 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/610d4fe1cf8aeaf8f04d5f32ccce72ab827b1f25 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6123] [CTFE] Cannot call a template member method inside delegate/function literal with -inline.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6123 Don changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from Don 2011-06-11 06:42:31 PDT --- Fixed by implementing pointers in CTFE. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/846aa2683ec63c364e72281c4c655387806558e2 D1 fix: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/16c9700caab0bece92212c5e1a52b323258d7633 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3960] Unused local variables not reported
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3960 --- Comment #13 from Stewart Gordon 2011-06-11 06:30:32 PDT --- (In reply to comment #11) > It actually seems more likely that this is a bug in the spec, as I think > Walter > is against pretty much anything that requires flow analysis. What has this issue to do with flow analysis? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3960] Unused local variables not reported
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3960 --- Comment #12 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-06-11 02:41:14 PDT --- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #8) > > This is accepts-invalid, not an enhancement request. > > > > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/function.html > > "It is an error to declare a local variable that is never referred to." > > See: > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/bugs/2105.html > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/Re_Wish_Variable_Not_Used_Warning_73539.html > > It actually seems more likely that this is a bug in the spec, as I think > Walter > is against pretty much anything that requires flow analysis. In the beginning this was an enhancement request, now someone has made it a kind of error. But in the end the situation is the same. In most cases in well written code you don't want unused variables, and various experiments have shown that unused experiments are often associated with bugs. On the other hand lint tools in C that are able to spot such unused variables are seldom used, and several of the most used compilers do spot such unused variables today. So I conclude that I'd like the D compiler to spot them automatically for me. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4628] Casting away const should be allowed in safe mode if no indirection
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4628 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from yebblies 2011-06-11 01:01:22 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5088 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5088] Cannot cast const(int) to long in @safe function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5088 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zan77...@nifty.com --- Comment #3 from yebblies 2011-06-11 01:01:40 PDT --- *** Issue 4689 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5088] Cannot cast const(int) to long in @safe function
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5088 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dsim...@yahoo.com --- Comment #2 from yebblies 2011-06-11 01:01:22 PDT --- *** Issue 4628 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4689] Error: cast from const(int) to real not allowed in safe code
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4689 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from yebblies 2011-06-11 01:01:40 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5088 *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3636] module-level @safe not propagated to struct members
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3636 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||yebbl...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #1 from yebblies 2011-06-11 00:49:28 PDT --- This code now works (dmd2.053) -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6023] std.random.uniform and std.bigint.BigInt compilation error
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6023 Don changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #3 from Don 2011-06-11 00:49:41 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > The error message is the one returned when std.conv.to!string(BigInt) is > called. > > std.bigint doesn't support std.conv.to!string. (You know all about this from > 5231.) This has been reported several times already. More accurately, to!string doesn't support std.bigint. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6146] New: A way to mark a static construct as having no dependencies
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6146 Summary: A way to mark a static construct as having no dependencies Product: D Version: unspecified Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #0 from Jonathan M Davis 2011-06-11 00:19:12 PDT --- It would really help in dealing with circular dependencies between modules if it were possible to mark a static constructor as not having any dependencies. It's often the case, and it's a royal pain to get rid of a circular dependency once the compiler (or is it druntime?) decides that you have one. If you have a true circular dependency, then you need to redesign things, but if you don't, then the current status of things is _very_ annoying. It seems to me that it could be as simple as adding a new attribute (e.g. @nodeps) which only applied to static constructors and then that static constructor is then ignored in the tests for circular dependencies. I don't know how much work it would be to effect such a change, but it at least seems like it would be a fairly small change, and it would have major benefits. It's incredibly easy to get a circular dependency once you start using many static constructors, and the vast majority of the time there isn't really a dependency. So, having a means to indicate that a static constructor has no external dependencies would help a lot. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
