http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3963
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3667
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=122
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=124
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=122
--- Comment #4 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-03-15 02:08:52 PDT ---
Sorry, that patch came out wrong. The first line belongs further up in the
function.
Around line 965:
{
p = skipwhitespace(p);
pstart = p;
+pend = p;
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
--- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-03-15 07:37:30 PDT ---
The ToString name with no bang inside the template refers to itself. Then for
the compiler what's the meaning of ToString(x % 10) inside this template?
The error message
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
--- Comment #3 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-03-15
07:44:20 PDT ---
The error is a recursive expansion. I think it's fairly obvious. The compiler
cannot expand the template because the template depends on the result of
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
--- Comment #4 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-03-15 07:59:27 PDT ---
This code:
template ToString(ulong x) {
static if (x 10)
enum string ToString = ~ cast(char)(x + '0');
else
enum string ToString = ToString!(x /
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
--- Comment #5 from Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com 2010-03-15
08:16:28 PDT ---
The compiler can't figure out whether ToString is a function or not, because it
can't evaluate it. It's like asking for this:
void 12345()
{
}
to
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3964
Summary: Hello World, Reloaded example on 1.0 page has writeln
Product: D
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: trivial
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3965
Summary: Multiple static this() can be a little error-prone
Product: D
Version: 2.041
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3967
Summary: bool opEquals() for structs instead of int opEquals()
Product: D
Version: 2.041
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Keywords: accepts-invalid
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3969
Summary: Built-in compile time errors against usage of wrong
operator strings
Product: D
Version: 2.041
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3970
Summary: Problem with cast -1.0L == uint/ulong
Product: D
Version: 2.041
Platform: x86
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3942
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3958
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2513
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3970
Aldo Nunez aldonun...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldonun...@gmail.com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1628
--- Comment #1 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-03-15 12:55:16 PDT ---
Created an attachment (id=589)
Patch against DMD2.042 svn 416
Also fixes bug 122.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1628
--- Comment #2 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-03-15 12:57:45 PDT ---
This is pretty simple, we just need to cope with the case where the code
section is empty.
I also generate an error for cases like:
/**
this code doesn't have a proper
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=122
--- Comment #5 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-03-15 12:58:16 PDT ---
See bug 1628 for a better patch.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3857
Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P3
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3808
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3965
Trass3r mrmoc...@gmx.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrmoc...@gmx.de
--- Comment
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3971
Summary: Syntax semantics for array assigns
Product: D
Version: 2.041
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3972
Summary: Regarding module with name different from its file
name
Product: D
Version: 2.041
Platform: x86
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
Keywords:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3973
Summary: out contracts fail with ref return types
Product: D
Version: 2.041
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3667
--- Comment #5 from Luther Tychonievich la...@virginia.edu 2010-03-15
20:43:30 PDT ---
Not sure if it helps, but the compiler knows this problem will arise at compile
time; the following compiles just fine, though it clearly should not:
-
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3918
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
---
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3918
--- Comment #2 from Aldo Nunez aldonun...@gmail.com 2010-03-15 21:49:32 PDT
---
Actually, I'm fine with NaN going either way, as long as it's consistent... and
documented.
--
Configure issuemail:
30 matches
Mail list logo
