But first we have several new regressions to deal with:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

From: "Walter Bright" <walter@digitalmars.com>
> But first we have several new regressions to deal with:
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED

This should probably get in there, too:

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/tools/pull/24

_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 29.03.2012 22:54, Walter Bright wrote:
> But first we have several new regressions to deal with:
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED 
>

On the phobos side of things, this should be pulled before release:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/462
There is no excuse to still have 2 major bugs in the next release.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky

_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

> On 29.03.2012 22:54, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> But first we have several new regressions to deal with:
>>
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED

I think we should also introduce of policy of never shipping with
known compiler segfaults. The relevant bugs don't necessarily need to
be fixed, just replaced
with an assert, so it's hardly any work. There's only a couple of them
right now.
Likewise bug 7190 -- it's a simple infinite loop, that doesn't even
cause a stack overflow, so DMD just hangs. It should become an assert
failure.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

An error (with a line number) would be even better than an assert in many cases, as it would at least give an indication of what need to be changed to work around the compiler bug.

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 21:58, Don Clugston <dclugston@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On 29.03.2012 22:54, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>
>>> But first we have several new regressions to deal with:
>>>
>>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED
>
> I think we should also introduce of policy of never shipping with
> known compiler segfaults. The relevant bugs don't necessarily need to
> be fixed, just replaced
> with an assert, so it's hardly any work. There's only a couple of them
> right now.
> Likewise bug 7190 -- it's a simple infinite loop, that doesn't even
> cause a stack overflow, so DMD just hangs. It should become an assert
> failure.
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 30 Mar 2012, at 13:13, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> An error (with a line number) would be even better than an assert in
> many cases, as it would at least give an indication of what need to be
> changed to work around the compiler bug.

+1, in cases where reasonable location information can be given easily. Avoiding segfaults is certainly an important step in terms of perceived quality, but I think that giving the user at least a diffuse idea of what piece of code triggered the bug when searching for a workaround (without needing to know how to dump DMD source location data from inside GDB) would help greatly reducing the frustration in »Help, DMD ICEs on my 20-module project and I have no idea what to do« cases.

Of course, this is only applicable to a fairly small share of all bugs, and without understanding the problem and thus probably being able to fix the bug anyway, the information given might always be off somewhat, but as long as a message is easy to add…

David
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 30 March 2012 15:22, David Nadlinger <code@klickverbot.at> wrote:
> On 30 Mar 2012, at 13:13, Daniel Murphy wrote:
>>
>> An error (with a line number) would be even better than an assert in many cases, as it would at least give an indication of what need to be changed to work around the compiler bug.
>
>
> +1, in cases where reasonable location information can be given easily. Avoiding segfaults is certainly an important step in terms of perceived quality, but I think that giving the user at least a diffuse idea of what piece of code triggered the bug when searching for a workaround (without needing to know how to dump DMD source location data from inside GDB) would help greatly reducing the frustration in »Help, DMD ICEs on my 20-module project and I have no idea what to do« cases.
>
> Of course, this is only applicable to a fairly small share of all bugs, and without understanding the problem and thus probably being able to fix the bug anyway, the information given might always be off somewhat, but as long as a message is easy to add…

It's not easy to add. There are about **75** open ICE bugs ( I got it
down to 11 once, but it's crept back up - sigh).
At least if there is an assert failure, you know instantly that it was
a compiler bug, and you can search bugzilla.

There are three unpatched segfaults I found ( 6358,  6951=7478, 7602)
+ the infinite loop (7140)
+ two I've got pull requests for (7380 7639) + two which seem to be
already fixed in git master (6723 7709).
So it's quite manageable to deal them all.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 3/29/2012 11:54 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
> But first we have several new regressions to deal with:
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED 
>
>

Any takers for this one:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7735
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

Posted: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/854

Kenji Hara

2012$BG/(B3$B7n(B31$BF|(B10:19 Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com>:
>
>
> On 3/29/2012 11:54 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> But first we have several new regressions to deal with:
>>
>>
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED
>>
>
> Any takers for this one:
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7735
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

You da man!

On 3/31/2012 5:17 AM, kenji hara wrote:
> Posted: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/854
>
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta