[Issue 4164] sieve Sample D Program -- need documentation for array representation
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4164 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-18 22:59:45 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/528 -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4195] Forward reference error with struct opCall and const
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4195 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-18 23:00:52 PDT --- The provided code works as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12409] New: Add each function as found in Ruby and jQuery
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12409 Summary: Add each function as found in Ruby and jQuery Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: Phobos AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: thecybersha...@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 08:13:51 EET --- each is like map, but iterates over the range eagerly, and returns void. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4431] Template favors alias parameter for struct
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4431 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-18 23:12:45 PDT --- Why is this a bug? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3699] Feature Request: while-else
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3699 --- Comment #8 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com 2014-03-18 23:12:04 PDT --- Thanks for cleaning up the list! -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4394] std.xml prints empty elements as non-empty
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4394
Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com
Resolution||WORKSFORME
--- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-18 23:11:00
PDT ---
This looks correct as of v2.065.
import std.stdio;
import std.xml;
void main() {
Element element = new Element(br);
writeln(element);
}
Application output:
br /
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4699] Functions in peer scopes cannot have the same name
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4699 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-18 23:29:45 PDT --- Why is this a bug? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12409] Add each function as found in Ruby and jQuery
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12409 --- Comment #1 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 08:34:51 EET --- ECMAScript 5.1 also has this for arrays: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/forEach -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12409] Add each function as found in Ruby and jQuery
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12409 Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 08:36:10 EET --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2024 -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12409] Add each function as found in Ruby and jQuery
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12409 --- Comment #5 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 08:39:58 EET --- Oh, and foreach doesn't have auto ref, does it? It's one reason to use fun(r.front) + popFront instead of foreach. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12409] Add each function as found in Ruby and jQuery
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12409 --- Comment #4 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 08:38:59 EET --- You can put it at the end of UFCS chains. See e.g. the example included with the pull. It is essentially a small bit of sugar, but seeing how it's present in other languages, I think it makes sense to add. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12409] Add each function as found in Ruby and jQuery
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12409 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-18 23:37:10 PDT --- What's the difference between this and using foreach, though? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12398] Selective imports no longer act as static imports
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12398 --- Comment #8 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 10:12:51 EET --- (In reply to comment #7) static import std.stream : Stream; Honestly if I saw that, I'd think it only allowed referring only to Stream and only by its fully-qualified name. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12398] Selective imports no longer act as static imports
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12398
--- Comment #7 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2014-03-19
01:11:01 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Oh, I see. Thanks.
Invalid? Or enhancement? I think selective imports ought to also act as static
imports.
For that I suggest:
-
static import std.stream : Stream;
void main()
{
std.stream.File f;
}
-
This is currently disallowed:
Error: static import stream cannot have an import bind list
So it wouldn't be a breaking change to add support.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12410] New: non-parametrized helper function in eponymous template is not inferred
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12410
Summary: non-parametrized helper function in eponymous template
is not inferred
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: monarchdo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from monarchdo...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 01:36:26 PDT ---
Given:
- An eponymous template
- A non-parametrized function
- That is not eponymous
= inference is not triggered
//
template sift1(T)
{
void sift1() //Infered
{}
}
template sift2(T)
{
void siftImpl() //*NOT* infered
{}
void sift2() //Infered
{
siftImpl();
}
}
void main() @safe pure nothrow
{
sift1!int(); //OK!
sift2!int(); //FAILS!
}
//
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12411] New: New eponymous template syntax could support nested eponymous templates
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12411
Summary: New eponymous template syntax could support nested
eponymous templates
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2014-03-19
01:42:34 PDT ---
Example code:
-
import std.typetuple;
enum canAppend(R) = anySatisfy!(canAppendRange!R, Types);
private alias Types = TypeTuple!(int, float);
// problem: can't use new-style eponymous syntax for nexted templates
private template canAppendRange(R)
{
enum canAppendRange(T) = is(typeof({ R r = void; T t = void; r ~= t; }));
}
void main()
{
static assert(canAppend!(int[]));
static assert(canAppend!(float[]));
static assert(!canAppend!(byte[]));
}
-
Notice how 'canAppendRange' has to use the old-style eponymous syntax in order
for it to be usable with partial instantiation in the call to anySatisfy.
Perhaps a somewhat reasonable enhancement would be to allow nested eponymous
syntax:
-
enum canAppendRange(R)(T) = is(typeof({ R r = void; T t = void; r ~= t; }));
-
A simplified example test-case:
-
// old-style
template isEqual(T1)
{
template isEqual(T2)
{
enum bool isEqual = is(T1 == T2);
}
}
// new-style
enum isEqual(T1)(T2) = is(T1 == T2);
void main()
{
alias isInt = isEqual!int;
static assert(isInt!int);
}
-
The whole idea is to allow new syntax to allow easier writing of templates
which can be partially instantiated.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12410] non-parametrized helper function in eponymous template is not inferred
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12410
--- Comment #1 from monarchdo...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 02:01:14 PDT ---
Actually, it's a bit simpler than that. All it takes is being non eponymous:
template sift(T)
{
void impl() //Not infered
{}
}
void main() @safe pure nothrow
{
sift!int.impl(); //Fails
}
Not sure if bug or enhancement, but I think this should work: impl depends on
T.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12300] Deprecated variables still accessible using tupleof
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12300 Dicebot pub...@dicebot.lv changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #3 from Dicebot pub...@dicebot.lv 2014-03-19 02:30:22 PDT --- closing after internal discussion as invalid -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3882] Unused result of pure functions
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3882 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #32 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2014-03-19 02:39:47 PDT --- (In reply to comment #31) There's a corresponding pull request for dmd that hasn't been merged yet Then the issue is reopened until the dmd pull request is merged. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3882] Unused result of pure functions
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3882 --- Comment #31 from Per Nordl�w per.nord...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 02:35:38 PDT --- There's a corresponding pull request for dmd that hasn't been merged yet because Phobos still generates warnings (assumeSafeAppend). I don't understand why I don't get these warnings when I do make unittest on Ubuntu box. I'll fix these on Phobos and try again. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5074] array(immutable(int)[]) == int[]
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5074 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 03:47:35 PDT --- I agree with bearophile here; array() should digest whatever you iterate and produce a dynamic array. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1317] Document suggested means of overlapping array copy
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1317 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2014-03-19 03:45:56 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/527 The suggested method with dup+slices doesn't look very good. Don't we have something better? For PODs even core.stdc.string.memmove sounds better. Perhaps a new Phobos function is needed? Or perhaps std.algorithm.copy is enough? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5095] Error for typesafe variadic functions for structs
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5095 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 03:52:26 PDT --- In v2.065, this produces: Error: function f14.test (Foo f...) is not callable using argument types (int) Is that acceptable; or do you still want the second part which you suggested? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5099] Add enum size property
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5099 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 03:56:09 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 4997 *** -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4997] names, values, length and basetype enum properties
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4997 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ah0801...@yahoo.com --- Comment #5 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 03:56:10 PDT --- *** Issue 5099 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1317] Document suggested means of overlapping array copy
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1317 --- Comment #3 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 04:05:31 PDT --- Doesn't look good style-wise or performance-wise? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5160] Overzealous recursive template expansion protection.
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5160 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 04:09:21 PDT --- This compiles without errors with v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1317] Document suggested means of overlapping array copy
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1317 --- Comment #4 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2014-03-19 04:16:24 PDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Doesn't look good style-wise or performance-wise? I have not done benchmarks, but perhaps there are faster solutions. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5095] Error for typesafe variadic functions for structs
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5095 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2014-03-19 04:23:26 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) In v2.065, this produces: Error: function f14.test (Foo f...) is not callable using argument types (int) Is that acceptable; or do you still want the second part which you suggested? The error message is acceptable. Closed issue. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12412] New: std.math.isNaN is not available during CTFE
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12412 Summary: std.math.isNaN is not available during CTFE Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Keywords: CTFE Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Phobos AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com ReportedBy: thecybersha...@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 13:28:47 EET --- C:\...\std\math.d(4010,47): Error: Cannot convert real to ushort* at compile time This prevents using e.g. pow() during CTFE. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2954] [tdpl] Appalling bug in associative arrays (D2 only)
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2954 Denis Shelomovskij verylonglogin@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|patch | Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC||verylonglogin@gmail.com Platform|x86 |All Version|2.020 |D2 Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #8 from Denis Shelomovskij verylonglogin@gmail.com 2014-03-19 15:38:05 MSK --- Why is it marked as fixed? If we are talking about original testcase, just replace `hash[a]` with `const ca = a; hash[ca]` and the program will work as in description. I see no fundamental difference here. Currently implemented fix: the compiler checks whether a key as an array and, if it is, checks whether its elements are mutable, if mutable, it complains ...can only be assigned values with immutable keys (note even the error message is incorrect, not-mutable check and `immutable` in error). IMO, the issue is associative arrays accept non-`immutable` keys and those keys can later be changed. E.g. keys of pointers, classes, associative arrays, and structs/unions with mutable indirection. The whole issue is terrible and current inconsistent compiler behaviour with incorrect error message make situation even worse. The only visible solution is to disallow any associative array element set except with immutable key. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3699] Feature Request: while-else
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3699
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc
Resolution|WONTFIX |
--- Comment #9 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2014-03-19 05:36:12 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Four year old request. Can be discussed further on NG if required.
There are bugs that sleep in bugzilla for years just because no one has time or
desire to fix them, but they are still valid. I have plenty of similar bugs in
bugzilla. So closing down an issue just for lack of fixes is not a good idea.
And a Python-like else clause of while/for/foreach is nice. You can replace
code like:
bool ok = true;
foreach (...) {
...
if (cond) {
ok = false;
break;
}
}
if (!ok) { ... }
With:
foreach (...) {
...
if (cond)
break;
} else { ... }
Reopened until we have a true decision.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12413] New: Infinite recursion of `Package::search`
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12413
Summary: Infinite recursion of `Package::search`
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Keywords: ice
Severity: regression
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: verylonglogin@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Denis Shelomovskij verylonglogin@gmail.com 2014-03-19
19:32:58 MSK ---
This code causes an infinite recursion in dmd:
---
mixin template t()
{ static import std.ascii; }
class C
{
mixin t!();
void f() { std.x; }
}
---
At the end of `Package::search` `pkg-search` is called for `pkg =
enclosingPkg()` if any, and `pkg == this` so we call ourselves.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 11777] [ICE] dmd memory corruption as `Scope::pop` `free`s `fieldinit` used also in `enclosing`
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11777
Denis Shelomovskij verylonglogin@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
--- Comment #10 from Denis Shelomovskij verylonglogin@gmail.com
2014-03-19 19:31:18 MSK ---
Let's add `assert(fieldinit != enclosing-fieldinit);` in `Scope::pop` before
we `free(fieldinit)`. This code fails the assertion (and `nofree` is `false`):
---
void f(void delegate(int)) { }
class C
{
int i;
this() { f((a) {}); }
}
---
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2954] [tdpl] Appalling bug in associative arrays (D2 only)
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2954
--- Comment #9 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com 2014-03-19 08:51:30
PDT ---
Thanks, indeed it wasn't fixed. Current test code:
import std.stdio;
void main() {
uint[string] hash;
char[] a = abc.dup;
const ca = a;
hash[ca] = 42;
a[0] = 'A';
writeln(hash.keys);
}
Accessing lvalues in a hash table must be done with a type assignable to the
key type. Rvalue lookup may be done with types only comparable t the key type.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12414] New: Assertion failure in 'template.c' on inout+foreach+template tuple parameter
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12414
Summary: Assertion failure in 'template.c' on
inout+foreach+template tuple parameter
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Keywords: ice
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: verylonglogin@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Denis Shelomovskij verylonglogin@gmail.com 2014-03-19
20:19:33 MSK ---
This code should compile:
---
void t(T...)(T) { }
void f1(inout int i)
{
const c = i;
t(c);
}
void f2(inout(int)[] arr)
{
foreach(ref e; arr)
t(e);
}
---
Assertion failure: '0' on line 1503 in file 'template.c'
---
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3699] Feature Request: while-else
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3699 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #10 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com 2014-03-19 08:55:27 PDT --- I don't think we can keep all proposals opened on the off chance one may be acted upon at some point. At some point we need to make a decision. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2482] Spec does not reference about special x functions in TypeInfo_Struct
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2482 Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Platform|x86 |All Version|2.019 |D2 Resolution|FIXED | OS/Version|Windows |All --- Comment #2 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2014-03-19 10:35:48 PDT --- This isn't exactly what I meant. It hints at the correct signature, but does not detail the reason for using that signature (i.e. it won't be used when calling TypeInfo.compare or TypeInfo.equals). In addition, the opEquals documentation is not very clear at all. Only ONE form gets turned into the xopEquals function pointer. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12351] rdmd --makedep(end|file) uses the source file as the target
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12351 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2014-03-19 12:37:06 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/tools https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/tools/commit/12e73a2537102c34e0d2c04361390e37f2389381 Fix issue 12351: rdmd --makedep(end|file) uses the source file as the target Having the source file as the target for the dependencies on a Makefile is useless, as there is no rule to rebuild the source file, Make can't use that information at all. To a have a meaningful target name, now --makedep* options require -of to be present too. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/tools/commit/09aaa0953e79052f70ea71800f3d344feec82ff3 Merge pull request #122 from leandro-lucarella-sociomantic/rdmd-exe-target Fix rdmd --makedep(end|file) (issues 12351 and 12354) -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12354] rdmd --makedep(end|file) doesn't output empty rules for all source files
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12354 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2014-03-19 12:37:12 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/tools https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/tools/commit/314d92e192c88ccd15982dd9b11f69aaafb47efa Fix issue 12354: rdmd --makedep(end|file) doesn't output empty rules for all source files Now rdmd --makedep(end|file) will print an empty rule for each source file. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/tools/commit/09aaa0953e79052f70ea71800f3d344feec82ff3 Merge pull request #122 from leandro-lucarella-sociomantic/rdmd-exe-target Fix rdmd --makedep(end|file) (issues 12351 and 12354) -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12415] New: lrintf doesn't seem to exist on Windows
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12415
Summary: lrintf doesn't seem to exist on Windows
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: druntime
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2014-03-19
14:02:33 PDT ---
-
import core.stdc.math;
void main()
{
lrintf(0.5);
}
-
Error 42: Symbol Undefined _lrintf
Same also with -m64 and using the VC linker.
I know std.math has an lrint function which we can use, but it's strange the
above would fail to link. If 'lrintf' is a Posix-only function then its
prototypes should not be visible on Windows.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12416] Template specialization with TemplateTupleParameter incorrect ordering
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12416 Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 14:10:35 PDT --- This was fixed in git-head, there was a report already but I can't find it right now. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 11777] [ICE] dmd memory corruption as `Scope::pop` `free`s `fieldinit` used also in `enclosing`
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11777 --- Comment #11 from Denis Shelomovskij verylonglogin@gmail.com 2014-03-19 19:48:50 MSK --- And again I was incorrect. Failing `enclosing-fieldinit != fieldinit` assertion is just another random victim in case we `free(fieldinit)`. If we don't free, it doesn't happen. So I provided a test-case but has no idea what is going on there. And do not forget workaround dmd pull 2990 is assumed to be reverted while testing. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12416] New: Template specialization with TemplateTupleParameter incorrect ordering
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12416
Summary: Template specialization with TemplateTupleParameter
incorrect ordering
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nob...@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: john.loughran.col...@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from John Colvin john.loughran.col...@gmail.com 2014-03-19
21:07:30 GMT ---
template Foo(T) { pragma(msg, 1); }
template Foo(A ...) { pragma(msg, 4); }
alias foo1 = Foo!(int);
This prints 4, not 1. This is wrong according to the docs:
If both a template with a tuple parameter and a template without a tuple
parameter exactly match a template instantiation, the template without a
TemplateTupleParameter is selected.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5998] Problem with heapified Array!BigInt
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5998 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@erdani.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #4 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com 2014-03-19 15:23:21 PDT --- Tested both, each prints 1 and returns normally. I assume some other fix took care of this. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5074] array(immutable(int)[]) == int[]
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5074 monarchdo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||monarchdo...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from monarchdo...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 15:36:51 PDT --- (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) to!(int[])(a) should take care of that. There are also const casts: array(cast(int[])a1) But the design point of array() is to digest anything you may iterate, and produce a dynamic array. So I think array(immutable(int)[]) should not require casts or to!(). In this case, is(immutable(int) : int) is true, but this is not true of all types, so array won't be able to do this for any and all types. That said, it doesn't seem ridiculous to me either: 1) Create an array of whatever an IFTI on the element type would produce. 2) Simply make mutable elements for types that can safely be converted to their Unqual type. However, this would be a change of behavior, which may or may not be an improvement, and may or may not break code. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12408] map does not like inout
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12408
monarchdo...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||monarchdo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from monarchdo...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 16:06:56 PDT ---
Seems invalid to me. Take a look at this reduced example:
//
struct L(T)
{
T t;
}
auto l(T)(T t)
{
return L!T();
}
class S
{
auto foo() inout
{
return l(a);
}
int a;
}
void main() { }
//
What's basically happening in foo, is you are creating a type
`L!(inout(int))`, which has a member t with qualifier `inout(int)`. That don't
make no sense.
You need to chose the static type you are returning. The type *itself* may be
marked as inout. However, that's not what you are doing: You are returning a
type that's parameterized on inout, which is not the same at all.
The idea of inout (as I have understood it), is that there is a *single*
implementation that is compatible for all of const/immutable/mutable. That's
not quite what you are doing. I think you simply need a const/non-const
overload. Then, they'll return 2 actual different types map!(L[]) and
map!(const(L)[]) (and you can even add an immutable overload if you so wish).
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5638] Auto-flattening std.range.chain()
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5638
Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com
Resolution||WORKSFORME
--- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 16:14:10
PDT ---
For the examples you provided, v2.065 gives the same typeid for all of them:
import std.range, std.stdio;
void main() {
auto c1 = chain(chain([1, 2]), [3, 4]);
writeln(c1);
writefln(chain(chain, range): %s, typeid(typeof(c1)));
auto c2 = chain([1, 2], chain([3, 4]));
writeln(c2);
writefln(chain(range, chain): %s, typeid(typeof(c2)));
auto c3 = chain(chain([1, 2]), chain([3, 4]));
writeln(c3);
writefln(chain(chain, chain): %s, typeid(typeof(c3)));
}
Application output:
[1, 2, 3, 4]
chain(chain, range): std.range.chain!(int[], int[]).chain.Result
[1, 2, 3, 4]
chain(range, chain): std.range.chain!(int[], int[]).chain.Result
[1, 2, 3, 4]
chain(chain, chain): std.range.chain!(int[], int[]).chain.Result
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5074] array(immutable(int)[]) == int[]
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5074 Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||peter.alexander...@gmail.co ||m --- Comment #5 from Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 16:14:14 PDT --- (In reply to comment #4) However, this would be a change of behavior, which may or may not be an improvement, and may or may not break code. It will break code. immutable(int)[] a = ...; immutable(int)[] b = array(a); This breaks if array returns int[]. I propose this is closed. array is one of the most commonly used functions in Phobos; I really can't see an API change for it ever happening -- especially one that is of debatable value. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5074] array(immutable(int)[]) == int[]
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5074 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #6 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com 2014-03-19 16:18:31 PDT --- agreed -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 12404] Zip.back is wrong
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12404
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter.alexander...@gmail.co
||m
--- Comment #1 from Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com 2014-03-19
16:23:52 PDT ---
Urgh, fixing this is going to be a breaking change, but not necessarily fix
bugs.
assert(zip(abc, 123).back == tuple('c', '3'));
That's correct, and works, but your fix requires length and indexing, which
narrow strings don't have.
If indexing and length aren't available, back should assert if the stopping
policy is not requireSameLength.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5784] Template instantiation with enum constant as parameter, missing implicit cast
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5784
Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com
Resolution||WORKSFORME
--- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 16:36:18
PDT ---
This seems to be fixed as of v2.065. The following compiles.
---
struct A(int n)
{
bool[n] nBooleans;
}
template isA(T)
{
static if (is(T X == A!N, int N))
enum isA = true;
else
enum isA = false;
}
enum int boolCount = 5;
alias A!boolCount fromEnum;
alias A!5 fromLiteral;
static assert(isA!(A!5)); // no longer fails
static assert(isA!(A!boolCount)); // no longer fails
static assert(is(A!5 == A!boolCount)); // pass
---
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5729] taking the address of a @property doesn't work
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5729 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #3 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 16:43:45 PDT --- a.bla correctly gets the address of the function. If this were changed for @properties only, as you seem to suggest, then how would one go about getting the address of the actual function? It would also lead to different semantics from the same syntax depending on whether the function were marked @property, which is highly undesirable (do you want to go check the class definition every time you want to get an address?) -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4767] dmd generates useless template bloat
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4767 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:21:46 PDT --- Brad, why did you re-open this bug? I think that there is sufficient discussion of template bloat elsewhere that this particular bug being open is unnecessary. So, considering that, could we close this off? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5838] splitter and split names
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5838 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:25:42 PDT --- Has there been any discussion on this elsewhere? Is this one of those shunned breaking changes? (If so, use of splitter could do the three-stage warn/depr/err process.) -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5871] schwartzSort with stable SwapStrategy errors
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5871 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #4 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:34:14 PDT --- The code provided in the description compiler as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5870] Debug code in SortedRange assumes it can always print the range
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5870 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:33:09 PDT --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2028 -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4767] dmd generates useless template bloat
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4767 --- Comment #3 from Brad Roberts bra...@puremagic.com 2014-03-19 17:36:16 PDT --- I reopened it after ngxjfg went on a bit of a rampage closing all the bugs he filed. This was one of them. If the bug is fixed, by all means close it. But don't close it just because of a vague notion of 'we know there are template bloat issues'. This bug report happens to be a really good specific example. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5874] alloca should be pure
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5874 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:40:05 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 4222 *** -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4222] druntime should apply @safe/@system/@trusted
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4222 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dsim...@yahoo.com --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:40:05 PDT --- *** Issue 5874 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5881] Spellchecker should include built-in keywords
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5881 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:43:00 PDT --- Everyone: is there a singular list of all the keywords somewhere? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5882] Helper inner function in body{} and out{}
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5882 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:45:24 PDT --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 4699 *** -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5901] std.random.normal(), std.random.fastNormal()
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5901 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:48:25 PDT --- Could you generalise this to a gaussian function which takes a, b, c, and d and make a PR? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4699] Functions in peer scopes cannot have the same name
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4699 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:45:25 PDT --- *** Issue 5882 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5892] Lazy evaluation of stack trace when exception is thrown
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5892 Adam D. Ruppe destructiona...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||destructiona...@gmail.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #3 from Adam D. Ruppe destructiona...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:53:19 PDT --- Yeah, the git version of dmd has it implemented for Windows (not sure who wrote that) and Posix (I did that in another bug report). Led to a *huge* speedup, 100-1000x depending on who ran the tests, making us competitive with if not faster than Java. I'll mark this as fixed as the next dmd release will have the new code. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5892] Lazy evaluation of stack trace when exception is thrown
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5892 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:50:03 PDT --- Has anybody implemented this yet? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4767] dmd generates useless template bloat
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4767 --- Comment #4 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:55:03 PDT --- Sounds fine by me. I was just going off Walter's comment. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4393] Very good dotProduct
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4393 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:56:16 PDT --- Andrei, since this is assigned to you: are you waiting on somebody/thing; or should this not be assigned to you? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5919] The declaration of static members depend in the order
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5919 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 17:58:05 PDT --- This compiles as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5838] splitter and split names
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5838 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2014-03-19 18:00:38 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) Has there been any discussion on this elsewhere? Probably not, as many other things in Bugzilla. Is this one of those shunned breaking changes? Probably yes. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5949] Mutable enum matrix rows
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5949 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:02:42 PDT --- Issue still exists as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5957] Ambiguous mangling of module and template in template symbol args
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5957 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:05:59 PDT --- Related to Issue 4268? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4268] ambiguous name mangling for local functions
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4268 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:05:42 PDT --- Related to Issue 5957? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5981] Can't used post defined constant at compile-time
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5981 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:11:51 PDT --- Provided code works as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6044] Cannot instantiate nested struct template from an alias of struct
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6044 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:23:31 PDT --- Provided code compiles as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6044] Cannot instantiate nested struct template from an alias of struct
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6044 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2413] getche differs from getch unexpectedly
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2413 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:30:31 PDT --- std.stdio.getch does not exist in the docs (dlang.org/phobos). Are these symbols hiding somewhere else now? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6112] Odd behavior of char comparison for ordering
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6112 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:34:36 PDT --- This compiles and runs without asserting as of v2.065. (Also did (b a) and (a != b) checks, to check them all.) -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4393] Very good dotProduct
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4393 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW --- Comment #6 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com 2014-03-19 18:32:47 PDT --- Have at it! -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6112] Odd behavior of char comparison for ordering
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6112 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6112] Odd behavior of char comparison for ordering
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6112 --- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com 2014-03-19 18:37:26 PDT --- thx -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6133] Improvements to RedBlackTree
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6133 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:37:36 PDT --- Could you please make a github pull request? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 4393] Very good dotProduct
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4393 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|and...@erdani.com |nob...@puremagic.com --- Comment #7 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:43:12 PDT --- Andrei, I shall take that as a this should not be assigned to me. Bearophile, would you happen to have (or could put together) a PR for this? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6294] Function overrides not checking for @property
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6294 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:56:15 PDT --- This now correctly does not compile, but the error messages could be improved: /d519/f363.o:(.rodata+0x48): undefined reference to `_D4f3631A3fooMFZi' /d519/f363.o:(.rodata+0x50): undefined reference to `_D4f3631A3barMFNdZi' /d519/f363.o:(.rodata+0xa8): undefined reference to `_D4f3631B3fooMFNdZi' /d519/f363.o:(.rodata+0xb0): undefined reference to `_D4f3631B3barMFZi' collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status --- errorlevel 1 -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6299] Auto constructor for heap structs too
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6299 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:57:08 PDT --- This works as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6300] Returning a cast(immutable) struct erroneously calls a matching constructor
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6300 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 18:59:32 PDT --- The provided code compiles and runs as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6313] Type deduction with const/in
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6313 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 19:02:14 PDT --- The provided code (minus the static assert in foo()) compiles and runs as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6394] template type constraints embedded in the function parameters.
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6394 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 19:13:36 PDT --- The proposed code compiles as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6410] Few common exceptions in std.exception
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6410 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 19:16:31 PDT --- This sounds like a great idea. The only change I'd suggest is from UncomparableException to IncomparableException. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6496] Fix std.process.browse per comments in pull request #154
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6496 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 19:22:17 PDT --- Jonathan, did you end up forgetting about this? :P -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6274] 'pure' for a whole struct definition
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6274
Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 19:21:22
PDT ---
Currently, instead of:
pure struct Foo { ... }
you can do:
struct Foo { pure: ... }
Is this acceptable?
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6574] Erroneous recursive call in template instantiation
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6574 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 20:18:16 PDT --- As of v2.065, the provided code compiles and runs without errors. Taking out the 'Foo!();' line causes a compilation warning about a size change but still seems to compile and run fine (though there probably is a bug there). -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1433] in array / slice / range / enum / ...
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1433 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 20:18:58 PDT --- Since the general sentiment is that using in like this, with different semantics, is a bad idea, should this be closed off? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5665] DmdScript Bug, Program.compile is very slow
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5665 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 20:44:00 PDT --- Everyone: can this bug be closed as it does not seem to relate to D itself? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6334] Template is silently not instantiated
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6334 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 20:48:19 PDT --- As of v2.065, the static assert is run, giving: /d910/f663.d(4): Error: static assert (0) is false Is that the expected behaviour? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6645] [SafeD] moveAll is not @trusted
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6645 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 20:58:44 PDT --- The provided code compiles and runs without error as of v2.065. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6454] @property doesn't need return type
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6454 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 21:14:54 PDT --- So where are we with this? Is this a feature not a bug? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6371] Small improvements to aid auto-building DMD from git
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6371 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 21:16:16 PDT --- Is this still an issue in today's git HEAD? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 6741] implicit casting of pure-function delegate result to immutable breaks immutability.
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6741 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 21:20:35 PDT --- Why is this a bug? With the delegate, it is the pointer itself which becomes immutable, not the pointed-to function. This appears to be correct behaviour. Furthermore, disallowing any delegate-containing object to be immutable seems unnecessarily strict for no (?) benefit. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 5756] amap() and maybe afilter() too
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5756 Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lt.infiltra...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Infiltrator lt.infiltra...@gmail.com 2014-03-19 21:21:18 PDT --- Would you like to create a PR for this? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
