[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #6 from David Simcha 2010-08-20 18:10:15 PDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > Deterministic test case (always crash on my machine): Apparently this test case is deterministic only on your machine. On my machine it doesn't reproduce

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #7 from David Simcha 2010-08-20 18:43:24 PDT --- Comment from Shin Fujishiro the Phobos mailing list, reproduced here to make it more public and permanent: Seems like a bug of Appender.writeCapacity(). It often writes 'cap' to wro

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 Don changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #8 from Don 2

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 nfx...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nfx...@gmail.com --- Comment #9 from

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 Steven Schveighoffer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||schvei...@yahoo.com --- Comment

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #11 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 05:20:08 PDT --- This is still full of dirty runtime calls and attempts to emulate half of lifetime.d (though the worst part is commented). Why doesn't it simply use the D standard way to re-allo

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #12 from Steven Schveighoffer 2010-08-26 05:51:15 PDT --- (In reply to comment #11) > This is still full of dirty runtime calls and attempts to emulate half of > lifetime.d (though the worst part is commented). Why are runtime cal

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #13 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 06:20:17 PDT --- (In reply to comment #12) > Why are runtime calls dirty? I don't use any undocumented runtime > functions... Because they do more work than necessary and rely on more implement

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #14 from Steven Schveighoffer 2010-08-26 06:30:03 PDT --- (In reply to comment #13) > (In reply to comment #12) > > Why are runtime calls dirty? I don't use any undocumented runtime > > functions... > > Because they do more work

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 --- Comment #15 from nfx...@gmail.com 2010-08-26 10:12:08 PDT --- (In reply to comment #14) > I'm not assuming anything about the memory layout. GC.qalloc gives me a block > of data, and I'm using the data. Its interface is well defined withou

[Issue 4681] Appender access violation

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4681 David Simcha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|