Thread overview
September 24
Still on dmd-internals, while we're waiting for a D.internal newsgroup to be created.

You may notice that we skipped the 13th ;).

# Retro

On one hand dconf, all the import/lookup changes, a bigger non-D project (written in D though), and some vacations kept me extremely busy and contributed to the heavy delay during 2.071.x.

On the other hand I'm glad we've finished the language side of the big
import/lookup transition w/ 2.071.2.
The 2.071.x series is meant to be a stopgap for anyone
updating his code and I want to try something "new".  In case we find
more import/lookup issues, fixes for those should target 2.071.x
instead of stable so that we're able to make further 2.071.x point
releases.

<!-- Please add anything that needs to be said about the past months -->

# Planning

- 2.072.x


  - The phobos people were hard-working and accumulated a huge amount of
changes.

[phobos/changelog.dd](https://github.com/dlang/phobos/blob/bf14b1897e62f996cfbf8fc99dae9cf3476b3dfc/changelog.dd)
    So as said earlier we're directly rushing to the next release
beginning w/ a beta in about a week.


  - In case you have any partially finished work already merged into
    master, please make sure to either get that finished or revert it
    temporarily before we're merging master into stable (September 30th
    would be my targeted date for that).

    On a side node, we're also experimenting with feature branches
    ([dlang/dmd at newCTFE](https://github.com/dlang/dmd/tree/newCTFE))
    to merge bigger features incrementally in multiple PRs. If that
    works for us, it should help to avoid releasing partially finished
    feature.

  <!-- Please add anything left to say about 2.072 -->

- Next Month Development


  - [templated vector ops
(arrayOp)](https://trello.com/c/TNCQ6xBk/171-templated-library-arrayop-implementation-also-fixes-issue-15619)

    Lot's of work already done, RPN support in dmd and a working (for
    simple things) generic arrayOp.
    Still need to talk to gdc/ldc developers whether they want to rely
    on auto-vectorization instead of SIMD intrinsics.


  - templated library AA (core.aa) [more core.aa
feedback](https://trello.com/c/RDVhfCZR/235-more-core-aa-feedback),
[finish core.aa
implementation](https://trello.com/c/rgZ4Nd9g/236-finish-core-aa-implementation)

    We got some momentum to continue work on the core.aa proposal, see
discussions in the

[forum](http://forum.dlang.org/post/anhtpsftcedurgskfsgx@forum.dlang.org)
and on
    [GitHub](https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/1282). Still want to
get Walter into the
    discussion to check at least the planned language changes.

    - [Issue 11657 – Pass array literal to typesafe variadic argument on
stack](https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11657)
    - [Issue 11658 – implicit conversion of associative array literal to
(typesafe variadic) tuple
array](https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11658)

    Interestingly the first one comes w/ a reference escaping hole, see
    [Issue 5212 – no escape analysis for typesafe variadic function
arguments](https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5212),
    that nicely fits to the DIP25/1000 topic.


  - improve reliability of CI integration and install.sh script

  - <!-- Please add your own topics for the next month -->

-Martin



October 08
On 09/24/2016 04:52 AM, Martin Nowak via dmd-internals wrote:
> - Next Month Development
> 
>   - [templated vector ops
> (arrayOp)](https://trello.com/c/TNCQ6xBk/171-templated-library-arrayop-implementation-also-fixes-issue-15619)
> 
>     Lot's of work already done, RPN support in dmd and a working (for
>     simple things) generic arrayOp.
>     Still need to talk to gdc/ldc developers whether they want to rely
>     on auto-vectorization instead of SIMD intrinsics.
> 
> 
>   - templated library AA (core.aa) [more core.aa
> feedback](https://trello.com/c/RDVhfCZR/235-more-core-aa-feedback),
> [finish core.aa
> implementation](https://trello.com/c/rgZ4Nd9g/236-finish-core-aa-implementation)
> 
>     We got some momentum to continue work on the core.aa proposal, see
> discussions in the

Change of plans, once 2.072 is out, I'll join and help Walter with his
work on memory safety (DIP1000 et.al.).
So the templated runtime API will have to wait until at least 2.074 (Feb
2017) unless someone else picks it up ;).

Walter is mainly working on persuading people of his DIP1000 work and
PR, but also enjoys translating dmd's backend while waiting for responses.

Stefan Koch is currently working on adapting it's CTFE bytecode API to LLVM's backend in order to verify the design of the API. http://forum.dlang.org/post/acmqjjnecwryyzpklgjx@forum.dlang.org

-Martin



October 08
Final review/decision regarding https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md and https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md is scheduled for the end of October.



October 08
Did the second link mean to be https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1002.md? -- Andrei

On 10/8/16 1:17 PM, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals wrote:
> Final review/decision regarding
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md and
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md is scheduled
> for the end of October.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-internals mailing list
> dmd-internals@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
>
_______________________________________________
dmd-internals mailing list
dmd-internals@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
October 08
On 10/08/2016 09:01 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Did the second link mean to be https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1002.md? -- Andrei
> 
> On 10/8/16 1:17 PM, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals wrote:
>> Final review/decision regarding https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md and https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md is scheduled for the end of October.

Correct, thank you.




October 11
On 10/08/2016 07:17 PM, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals wrote:
> Final review/decision regarding https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md and https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md is scheduled for the end of October.

Thanks for letting us know. Not that much time left, would you say that enough qualified people participated in the review to make those decisions?



October 11
On 10/11/2016 04:29 AM, Martin Nowak via dmd-internals wrote:
> On 10/08/2016 07:17 PM, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals wrote:
>> Final review/decision regarding https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md and https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1001.md is scheduled for the end of October.
> 
> Thanks for letting us know. Not that much time left, would you say that enough qualified people participated in the review to make those decisions?

At this stage DIP process is not intended to guarantee quality review, it has rather different purpose of providing standard protocol for proposing language change to be evaluated by Andrei and Walter.

In this specific case I have warned both DIP authors that their proposals are scheduled for decision in the beginning of October (via Github ping, sadly they haven't provided me e-mail contacts) but so far there were neither more improvements coming nor request to delay the decision.

In such situation I don't see any reason to keep things waiting. Better to have official decision from Andrei and Walter and move on, otherwise it will degrade to the state of old DIP queue.



October 11
On 2016-10-11 13:21, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals wrote:
> sadly they haven't provided me e-mail contacts) but so far
> there were neither more improvements coming nor request to delay the
> decision.

FYI: Typically an easy way to find someone's email contact is to have a look at the git log ;-)

> _______________________________________________
> dmd-internals mailing list
> dmd-internals@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
_______________________________________________
dmd-internals mailing list
dmd-internals@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
October 11
On 10/11/16 7:21 AM, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals wrote:
> At this stage DIP process is not intended to guarantee quality review,
> it has rather different purpose of providing standard protocol for
> proposing language change to be evaluated by Andrei and Walter.

Hopefully we'll get more structure than that soon. The key would be to get language design experts on team for core language matters. For library matters we have a few experts on roster already who can weigh in. Also, in the future we'll need more specialized teams for things like numerics, concurrency, parallelism etc.

> In this specific case I have warned both DIP authors that their
> proposals are scheduled for decision in the beginning of October (via
> Github ping, sadly they haven't provided me e-mail contacts) but so far
> there were neither more improvements coming nor request to delay the
> decision.
>
> In such situation I don't see any reason to keep things waiting. Better
> to have official decision from Andrei and Walter and move on, otherwise
> it will degrade to the state of old DIP queue.

Agreed. So can I consider the deadline has passed, take a snapshot of the DIP from github, and review it? My plan (after consulting with Walter as well) is to provide a detailed written review with a decision.


Thanks,

Andrei
_______________________________________________
dmd-internals mailing list
dmd-internals@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
October 11
On 10/11/2016 09:29 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> In such situation I don't see any reason to keep things waiting. Better to have official decision from Andrei and Walter and move on, otherwise it will degrade to the state of old DIP queue.
> 
> Agreed. So can I consider the deadline has passed, take a snapshot of the DIP from github, and review it? My plan (after consulting with Walter as well) is to provide a detailed written review with a decision.

Announced deadline was end of October so let's stick to that.

BR,
Dicebot