On Sunday, January 29, 2012 08:43:54 sclytrack wrote:
> Prior to filing the bug I tried to compile dmd from source.
> I have now succeeded. The only problem I had was a missing
> symbolic link libstdc++.so and this in Ubuntu 11.10. So
> I just created it.
>
> /usr/lib32/libstdc++.so -> /usr/lib/i3
Prior to filing the bug I tried to compile dmd from source.
I have now succeeded. The only problem I had was a missing
symbolic link libstdc++.so and this in Ubuntu 11.10. So
I just created it.
/usr/lib32/libstdc++.so -> /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6
Then "make -f posix" and in the dmd
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 2:04 PM, sclytrack wrote:
>
>
> Now I've waisted Walter's precious time.
> I feel so sad now :-(
>
I should have made a post about the fact that I had already bug
reported it, but I forgot. Sorry.
Now I've waisted Walter's precious time.
I feel so sad now :-(
On 01/28/2012 07:49 PM, Caligo wrote:
I've already reported, and it's been fixed in the latest:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7376
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:56 AM, sclytrack wrote:
On 01/25/2012 01:12 AM, Tim
I've already reported, and it's been fixed in the latest:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7376
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:56 AM, sclytrack wrote:
> On 01/25/2012 01:12 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>
>> On 01/24/2012 10:28 PM, %u wrote:
>>>
>>> Shouldn't this go into 'digitalmars.D' ?
>>
On 01/28/2012 04:56 PM, sclytrack wrote:
On 01/25/2012 01:12 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 01/24/2012 10:28 PM, %u wrote:
Shouldn't this go into 'digitalmars.D' ?
It should go straight to the bug tracker.
Issue 7391 - floating wtf dmd 2.057 64
Thanks!
On 01/25/2012 01:12 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 01/24/2012 10:28 PM, %u wrote:
Shouldn't this go into 'digitalmars.D' ?
It should go straight to the bug tracker.
Issue 7391 - floating wtf dmd 2.057 64
On 01/24/2012 10:28 PM, %u wrote:
Shouldn't this go into 'digitalmars.D' ?
It should go straight to the bug tracker.
Shouldn't this go into 'digitalmars.D' ?
Am 24.01.2012 19:13, schrieb Caligo:
How did you compile it? As in my original post, it matters how you
compile it. In this case (I'm on a 64-bit GNU/Linux system),
compiling with '-inline' doesn't trigger the bug.
im on win7 (64bit) - but the windows dmd2.057 isn't able to produce x64
code
How did you compile it? As in my original post, it matters how you
compile it. In this case (I'm on a 64-bit GNU/Linux system),
compiling with '-inline' doesn't trigger the bug.
Am 24.01.2012 18:49, schrieb sclytrack:
dmd 2.057 give this result under windows/32bit
calculate1:
1.5
1.5
calculate2:
1.5
1.5
calculate3:
1.5
1.5
so its seems to be an x64 compiler bug
Yes, I missed my lessons in clear communication.
-
+
12 matches
Mail list logo