[Issue 5133] dmd fails to build rdmd (problem with startsWith)

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5133 Shin Fujishiro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Issue 5154] Class Range does not work in writeln

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5154 Shin Fujishiro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Issue 4445] roundTo!ubyte(255.0) throws

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4445 Shin Fujishiro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Issue 3463] Integrate Precise Heap Scanning Into the GC

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3463 --- Comment #82 from Leandro Lucarella 2010-11-14 19:17:59 PST --- Maybe you should try with LDC's or GDC's issues trackers, as this is an implementation detail maybe it gets better reception there (but it would be hard to get accepted there s

[Issue 3463] Integrate Precise Heap Scanning Into the GC

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3463 --- Comment #81 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 18:06:05 PST --- I obsoleted all the patches because they were outdated (too old dmd/Tango versions). I don't think it's very efficient to make new patches and post them here (I mean, there are al

[Issue 5217] Permit static+abstract

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5217 Jonathan M Davis changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #1

[Issue 5217] New: Permit static+abstract

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5217 Summary: Permit static+abstract Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: DMD

[Issue 5125] Optional function purity/nothrowness

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5125 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-11-14 11:27:06 PST --- Another idea: http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=122087 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cg

[Issue 5195] Forward references ignore const

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5195 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 4712] Issue of destructor for temporary instance of structs

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4712 SHOO changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 5216] New: /+ parsed incorrectly in comments

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5216 Summary: /+ parsed incorrectly in comments Product: D Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Comp

[Issue 3516] Destructor not called on temporaries

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3516 Max Samukha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||samu...@voliacable.com --- Comment #10 f

Re: Compiler optimization breaks multi-threaded code

2010-11-14 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On Sunday 14 November 2010 01:04:46 Michal Minich wrote: > There is one question on SO which seems like a serious problem for atomic > ops. > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4165149/compiler-optimization-breaks- > multi-threaded-code > > in short: > > shared uint cnt; > void atomicInc ( )

Compiler optimization breaks multi-threaded code

2010-11-14 Thread Michal Minich
There is one question on SO which seems like a serious problem for atomic ops. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4165149/compiler-optimization-breaks- multi-threaded-code in short: shared uint cnt; void atomicInc ( ) { uint o; while ( !cas( &cnt, o, o + 1 ) ) o = cnt; } is compile with dmd -

[Issue 5164] Error without line number using "is (T...)"

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5164 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 3827] automatic joining of adjacent strings is bad

2010-11-14 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3827 --- Comment #16 from Don 2010-11-13 23:58:35 PST --- Sorry, missed out a line: if (e1->op == TOKcat && (e2->op == TOKstring || e2->op == TOKnull) && (((CatExp *)e1)->e2->op == TOKstring || ((CatExp *)e1)->e2->op == TOKnull))