http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10039
monarchdo...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||monarchdo...@gmail.com
--- Co
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10838
Maxim Fomin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma...@maxim-fomin.ru
--- Comment #2 fro
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10793
Henning Pohl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10497
Henning Pohl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10844
Summary: Importing package as module fails with nested packages
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10845
Summary: std.range.Cycle broken for reference type forward
ranges
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10039
--- Comment #8 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-08-18 05:36:59 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> TLDR: I think this allowing single arg min/max is a bad idea.
I agree. Let's close WONTFIX this issue?
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.purema
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10845
monarchdo...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||monarchdo...@gmail.com
--- Co
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10039
--- Comment #9 from monarchdo...@gmail.com 2013-08-18 05:50:57 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
>
> > TLDR: I think this allowing single arg min/max is a bad idea.
>
> I agree. Let's close WONTFIX this issue?
Unfor
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1238
Adam D. Ruppe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||destructiona...@gmail.com
--- Comment
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #8 from Stewart Gordon 2013-08-18 09:24:53 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> This is a feature of D
According to which bit of the spec?
> - in general case any attribute is legal (except those for which
> there are arbitrary che
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #9 from Maxim Fomin 2013-08-18 09:35:09 PDT
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > This is a feature of D
>
> According to which bit of the spec?
>
> > - in general case any attribute is legal (except those f
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9631
--- Comment #5 from Andrej Mitrovic 2013-08-18
11:08:04 PDT ---
Here's another example:
test.d:
-
module test;
import foo;
struct S { }
void main()
{
test(S());
}
-
-
module foo;
struct S { }
void test(S s) { }
-
t
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #10 from Stewart Gordon 2013-08-18 13:54:30 PDT ---
Yes, that was the essence of bug 3118. It seems Walter wontfix'd it because he
feels each attribute needs to be considered individually.
The only explanation of pure that I've ma
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan M Davis 2013-08-18 14:14:17
PDT ---
> In the absence of any explanation of what pure means applied to variables, I
> can only be assumed that pure cannot be applied to variables, and therefore
> any attempt to ap
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10846
Summary: Allow defining functions in enum declarations
Product: D
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10846
--- Comment #1 from Andrej Mitrovic 2013-08-18
15:09:20 PDT ---
Another alternative is to relax the function hijacking protection a little bit.
If function "foo" in module "a" takes a user-defined type, and function "foo"
in module "b" take
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10846
--- Comment #2 from Andrej Mitrovic 2013-08-18
15:15:55 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Another alternative is to relax the function hijacking protection a little
> bit.
>
> If function "foo" in module "a" takes a user-defined type, and
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10761
--- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-08-18 16:40:54 PDT ---
Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/882fa1ea590aca24e03e96eceffc879071d6c70
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10761
Walter Bright changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10758
Walter Bright changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10758
--- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-08-18 16:40:58 PDT ---
Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/988eae63db3be236428f7753dee0812ef6aed5e
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #12 from Stewart Gordon 2013-08-18 17:00:48 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #11)
>> In the absence of any explanation of what pure means applied to
>> variables, I can only be assumed that pure cannot be applied to
>> variables, and
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10847
Summary: uninitializedArray accepts arguments which make it
fail internally
Product: D
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Sev
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan M Davis 2013-08-18 17:17:33
PDT ---
> You're talking about what the compiler actually does, which is a different
> matter from what the spec indicates it should do.
Honestly, it really doesn't matter what the spe
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10844
Andrej Mitrovic changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
--- Comm
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10848
Summary: Compiler should always try to inlining a direct lambda
call
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Keywords: performan
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10849
Summary: -profile flag results in compiler errors with
std.parallelism
Product: D
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9524
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #14 from Maxim Fomin 2013-08-18 21:48:57 PDT
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Yes, that was the essence of bug 3118. It seems Walter wontfix'd it because
> he
> feels each attribute needs to be considered individually.
>
> The on
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #15 from Maxim Fomin 2013-08-18 21:52:09 PDT
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> > In the absence of any explanation of what pure means applied to variables, I
> > can only be assumed that pure cannot be applied to variables, and there
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5048
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5048
--- Comment #2 from hst...@quickfur.ath.cx 2013-08-18 22:05:28 PDT ---
I added an actual instantiation in main() in order to ensure that this isn't
just the compiler deferring compilation of the template; the code seems to
work:
-
import st
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7056
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
--- Com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7048
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
--- Com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6791
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
--- Com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5655
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6447
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
--- Com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan M Davis 2013-08-18 22:59:59
PDT ---
> Perhaps allow to apply storage classes to variables in block declarations like
> attribute: or attribute { } and ban them in single variable declarations?
That's basically wh
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #17 from Stewart Gordon 2013-08-18 23:05:47 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #13)
>> You're talking about what the compiler actually does, which is a
>> different matter from what the spec indicates it should do.
>
> Honestly, it real
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6791
monarchdo...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||monarchdo...@gmail.com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7432
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan M Davis 2013-08-18 23:30:45
PDT ---
> What you're basically saying here is that the language is _defined_ by the
> compiler, and consequently the compiler has no bugs.
No, I'm not saying that the compiler has no
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10847
monarchdo...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||monarchdo...@gmail.com
--- Co
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10848
Manu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||turkey...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Manu
44 matches
Mail list logo