[Issue 9156] std.complex inconsistency between `std.complex.Complex` vs `std.complex.complex`

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9156 monarchdo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 8841] Missing line numbers in stack trace?

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8841 Rainer Schuetze changed: What|Removed |Added CC||r.sagita...@gmx.de --- Comment #4 fr

[Issue 8705] std.conv.to bug, from documentation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8705 monarchdo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 8821] countUntil chokes on reference ranges

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8821 monarchdo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P2 |P5 Severity|normal

[Issue 8841] Missing line numbers in stack trace?

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8841 --- Comment #3 from Kenji Hara 2012-12-16 23:11:49 PST --- This seems a regression in 2.060. This code: void main() { assert(0); } With 2.059: > dmd -g -run test.d core.exception.AssertError@test(5): Assertion failure --

[Issue 8804] countUntil warning on an infinite range

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8804 monarchdo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 8556] Using take results in a corrupted call to opSlice

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8556 Kenji Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull --- Comment #8 from Kenji Hara 2012

[Issue 9159] Variable and function name are the same in mixin template can't be compiled

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9159 --- Comment #2 from Masahiro Nakagawa 2012-12-16 22:40:21 PST --- (In reply to comment #1) > Seems to be a regression from the description, marking as such to be sure it > gets a closer look before the release. Ah, I forgot to mark a regressi

[Issue 9168] New: AA.length is impure and unsafe

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9168 Summary: AA.length is impure and unsafe Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: druntime

[Issue 9167] New: A failed inlining of inner function

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9167 Summary: A failed inlining of inner function Product: D Version: D2 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Compon

[Issue 9166] std.typecons.Nullable doesn't work with a not mutable type

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9166 --- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2012-12-16 18:47:03 PST --- See also Issue 9164 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 9164] Can't easily assign one Nullable to another

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9164 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc --- Com

[Issue 9164] Can't easily assign one Nullable to another

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9164 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2012-12-16 18:46:52 PST --- See also Issue 9166 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Issue 9160] 2.061alpha multiSort no longer working with L-value only comparators

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9160 Kenji Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Issue 9166] New: std.typecons.Nullable doesn't work with a not mutable type

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9166 Summary: std.typecons.Nullable doesn't work with a not mutable type Product: D Version: D2 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Windows Status: NEW Keywords: rejects

[Issue 8752] Unsafe use of T.init should be allowed in @system function

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8752 Jonathan M Davis changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #1

[Issue 9160] 2.061alpha multiSort no longer working with L-value only comparators

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9160 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-12-16 17:34:19 PST --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commit/bde7cbad4dc1effa5ca2c23459b637172

[Issue 9165] New: Auto conversion from dynamic array to fixed size array at return

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9165 Summary: Auto conversion from dynamic array to fixed size array at return Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhan

[Issue 9159] Variable and function name are the same in mixin template can't be compiled

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9159 David Nadlinger changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@klickverbot.at Severit

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 --- Comment #12 from David Nadlinger 2012-12-16 08:29:56 PST --- Just as a general note, because not everybody might be aware of this: GCC has its own "pure" attribute with semantics different from its namesake in the D langauge. -- Configur

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 --- Comment #11 from Iain Buclaw 2012-12-16 08:27:35 PST --- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #3) > > I'm not sure that this isn't just a GDC bug. Why should status necessarily > > be > > thread-local? > > Maybe my conclusion

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 --- Comment #10 from Johannes Pfau 2012-12-16 08:24:13 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) > I'm not sure that this isn't just a GDC bug. Why should status necessarily be > thread-local? Maybe my conclusions were premature, but according to TDPL

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 --- Comment #9 from Iain Buclaw 2012-12-16 08:15:58 PST --- (In reply to comment #7) > Ah, GDC still implements atomic operations as normal D assignments combined > with a barrier intrinsic, right? If this is really the cause, I guess this > wo

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 --- Comment #8 from Iain Buclaw 2012-12-16 08:15:03 PST --- (In reply to comment #6) > > Could be something trivial such as the backend somehow deduces that the > > function (atomicLoad) is pure. > > I don't know anything about the gcc backend

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 --- Comment #7 from David Nadlinger 2012-12-16 08:02:45 PST --- Ah, GDC still implements atomic operations as normal D assignments combined with a barrier intrinsic, right? If this is really the cause, I guess this would be a good opportunity

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 jerro.pub...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jerro.pub...@gmail.com --- Com

[Issue 9162] [tdpl] Non-static structs should have access to outer lexical scope

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9162 Kenji Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull --- Comment #5 from Kenji Hara 2012

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 --- Comment #5 from Iain Buclaw 2012-12-16 03:59:53 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #2) > > The read/writes just need to be safeguarded by synchronized to prevent any > > memoization occuring. > > Okay, I admit that thi

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 --- Comment #4 from David Nadlinger 2012-12-16 02:56:04 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) > The read/writes just need to be safeguarded by synchronized to prevent any > memoization occuring. Okay, I admit that this is all just hand-waiving unt

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 David Nadlinger changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@klickverbot.at --- Comment #3 f

[Issue 9164] New: Can't easily assign one Nullable to another

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9164 Summary: Can't easily assign one Nullable to another Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P2 Componen

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ibuc...@ubuntu.com --- Comment #2 from I

[Issue 9163] std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #

[Issue 9163] New: std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc)

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9163 Summary: std.parallelism broken with extensive optimizations (gdc) Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: critical

[Issue 8443] [2.060 beta] Win32 linker bug with separate compilation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8443 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Platform|All

[Issue 9162] [tdpl] Non-static structs should have access to outer lexical scope

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9162 --- Comment #4 from Walter Bright 2012-12-16 01:07:31 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) > When using a normal method instead of a property I then get the error: > "Internal Error: ..\ztc\cod2.c 4727" on release build. Debug build does not > ret