First beta for the 2.075.0 release.

This release comes with various phobos additions, a repackaged std.datetime, configurable Fiber stack guard pages (now also on Posix), and optional precise scanning for the DATA/TLS segment (static data) on Windows.

http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.075.0.html

Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org

- -Martin

On Monday, 26 June 2017 at 11:53:57 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> First beta for the 2.075.0 release.
>
> This release comes with various phobos additions, a repackaged std.datetime, configurable Fiber stack guard pages (now also on Posix), and optional precise scanning for the DATA/TLS segment (static data) on Windows.
>
> http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.075.0.html
>
> Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org
>
> - -Martin

Martin,

there's a PR for the changelog which needs to be merged: https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/1821

On Monday, 26 June 2017 at 11:53:57 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> First beta for the 2.075.0 release.
>
> This release comes with various phobos additions, a repackaged std.datetime, configurable Fiber stack guard pages (now also on Posix), and optional precise scanning for the DATA/TLS segment (static data) on Windows.
>
> http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.075.0.html
>
> Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org
>
> - -Martin


what about DIP1000? Is it default?

"Deprecation: Comparison between different enumeration types const(Status) and Status; If this behavior is intended consider using std.conv.asOriginalType"

It' not really intended to disallow comparisons between const(Status) and Status, isn't it?

BTW:
There's a regression: running dmd with option -deps results in a segmentation fault. We can try to reduce the example.

On 6/27/2017 12:51 AM, Dsby wrote:
> what about DIP1000? Is it default?

No.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 06:44:10PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On 6/27/2017 12:51 AM, Dsby wrote:
> > what about DIP1000? Is it default?
> 
> No.

I've been seeing occasional linker errors when compiling with -dip1000 that go away when I drop -dip1000. However, I haven't had the time to reduce the code sufficiently to file a bug.  Is this a known issue, or should I schedule some time to reduce my code and file a bug?


T

-- 
Those who've learned LaTeX swear by it. Those who are learning LaTeX swear at it. -- Pete Bleackley

On Thursday, 29 June 2017 at 01:44:10 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 6/27/2017 12:51 AM, Dsby wrote:
>> what about DIP1000? Is it default?
>
> No.

When will it be default? 2.076 or 2.077?

On 6/28/2017 7:02 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> I've been seeing occasional linker errors when compiling with -dip1000
> that go away when I drop -dip1000. However, I haven't had the time to
> reduce the code sufficiently to file a bug.  Is this a known issue, or
> should I schedule some time to reduce my code and file a bug?

There was a known problem with that that was corrected by Rainer. I don't know if this means you've found another case or not.

On 6/28/2017 7:09 PM, Dsby wrote:
> On Thursday, 29 June 2017 at 01:44:10 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 6/27/2017 12:51 AM, Dsby wrote:
>>> what about DIP1000? Is it default?
>>
>> No.
> 
> When will it be default? 2.076 or 2.077?

I don't know at the moment. Currently, Phobos doesn't compile with it on because Phobos has some safety violations in it that need correction.

I expect a lot of existing code will have similar issues, and so we'll need a long period before making it the default.

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:27:33AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On 6/28/2017 7:02 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> > I've been seeing occasional linker errors when compiling with -dip1000 that go away when I drop -dip1000. However, I haven't had the time to reduce the code sufficiently to file a bug.  Is this a known issue, or should I schedule some time to reduce my code and file a bug?
> 
> There was a known problem with that that was corrected by Rainer. I don't know if this means you've found another case or not.

FYI I tried compiling with -dip1000 again on git HEAD, and it seems that the linker errors have gone away. So probably it was the same problem. If I see it again next time, I'll try to find some time to reduce it and file a bug.


T

-- 
In theory, software is implemented according to the design that has been carefully worked out beforehand. In practice, design documents are written after the fact to describe the sorry mess that has gone on before.