On Monday, 25 February 2013 at 01:04:01 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Feb 24, 2013 10:16 PM, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com
wrote:
On 2/24/2013 8:48 AM, SiegeLord wrote:
I am quite sick of DMDFE breaking my code every release with
bugs
that are then solved for the next release (that
On 25 February 2013 09:35, Don turnyourkidsintoc...@nospam.com wrote:
On Monday, 25 February 2013 at 01:04:01 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Feb 24, 2013 10:16 PM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com
wrote:
On 2/24/2013 8:48 AM, SiegeLord wrote:
I am quite sick of DMDFE breaking my
On Monday, 25 February 2013 at 10:09:18 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 25 February 2013 09:35, Don
turnyourkidsintoc...@nospam.com wrote:
On Monday, 25 February 2013 at 01:04:01 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Feb 24, 2013 10:16 PM, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com
wrote:
On 2/24/2013
I am quite sick of DMDFE breaking my code every release with bugs
that are then solved for the next release (that is, if they are
solved). If I track the latest compiler, then my code is broken
for older compilers (and you are kidding yourselves if you think
people always use the latest
On 02/24/2013 05:48 PM, SiegeLord wrote:
...
(because every DMDFE keeps adding features... soon we'll have all the
features)...
...
You realize that you are complaining about this in a feature request? :o)
Maybe this feature is already available and I'm not aware of it?
static
On Sunday, 24 February 2013 at 16:54:20 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
You realize that you are complaining about this in a feature
request? :o)
Using D requires doublethink.
Maybe this feature is already available and I'm not aware of
it?
static assert(__VERSION__==2060);
This works, but is it
On 02/24/2013 06:00 PM, SiegeLord wrote:
On Sunday, 24 February 2013 at 16:54:20 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
You realize that you are complaining about this in a feature request? :o)
Using D requires doublethink.
For the moment I'm just sticking with 2.060, because I have failed to
reduce all
On Sunday, 24 February 2013 at 17:05:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
The documentation is often wrong anyway, but here you go:
http://dlang.org/lex.html
(look for 'Special Tokens')
Hmm... it is documented as Compiler version as an integer, such
as 2001. I wouldn't except this to match the DMDFE
On 2/24/2013 8:48 AM, SiegeLord wrote:
I am quite sick of DMDFE breaking my code every release with bugs
that are then solved for the next release (that is, if they are
solved).
Here's the current regression list:
On 2/24/2013 9:05 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
For the moment I'm just sticking with 2.060, because I have failed to reduce all
the forward reference regressions introduced in 2.061.
I've found dustmite to be pretty helpful reducing things down.
On 02/24/2013 11:22 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/24/2013 9:05 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
For the moment I'm just sticking with 2.060, because I have failed to
reduce all
the forward reference regressions introduced in 2.061.
I've found dustmite to be pretty helpful reducing things down.
The
On Sunday, February 24, 2013 14:22:42 Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/24/2013 9:05 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
For the moment I'm just sticking with 2.060, because I have failed to
reduce all the forward reference regressions introduced in 2.061.
I've found dustmite to be pretty helpful reducing
On Feb 24, 2013 10:41 PM, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote:
On 02/24/2013 11:22 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/24/2013 9:05 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
For the moment I'm just sticking with 2.060, because I have failed to
reduce all
the forward reference regressions introduced in 2.061.
I've
On Feb 24, 2013 10:16 PM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com
wrote:
On 2/24/2013 8:48 AM, SiegeLord wrote:
I am quite sick of DMDFE breaking my code every release with bugs
that are then solved for the next release (that is, if they are
solved).
Here's the current regression list:
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 02:55:07PM -0800, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, February 24, 2013 14:22:42 Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/24/2013 9:05 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
For the moment I'm just sticking with 2.060, because I have failed
to reduce all the forward reference regressions
15 matches
Mail list logo
