Thread overview | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
March 14, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Update to fix: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/announce/Do_not_use_2.041_17841.html http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 You can download the software as a zip file from: http://download.digitalmars.com/dmd2beta.zip userid: customer passwd: download7 |
March 15, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter Bright | Looks good. Only thing is that the changelog doesn't contain any updates, and the docs don't reflect the new names of the array functions I added. It appears maybe that the docs were not regenerated. -Steve ----- Original Message ---- > From: Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> > To: Discuss the dmd beta releases for D <dmd-beta at puremagic.com> > Sent: Sun, March 14, 2010 5:12:50 PM > Subject: [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 > > Update to fix: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/announce/Do_not_use_2.041_17841.html http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 You > can download the software as a zip file from: http://download.digitalmars.com/dmd2beta.zip userid: > customer passwd: > download7 _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing > list > href="mailto:dmd-beta at puremagic.com">dmd-beta at puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta |
March 15, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter Bright | This is an awesome release. One thing though -- the Phobos unittests don't pass. The unittest around socket.d 292 fails on Windows. Admittedly, the unittests failed on the previous release, too, but I don't think we should do it again. At the very least we should do something like: unittest { Protocol proto = new Protocol; + version(Windows) { + pragma(msg, " --- socket.d(" ~ __LINE__ ~ ") broken test ---"); + } else { assert(proto.getProtocolByType(ProtocolType.TCP)); On 14 March 2010 22:12, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote: > Update to fix: > > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/announce/Do_not_use_2.041_17841.html http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 > > You can download the software as a zip file from: > > > http://download.digitalmars.com/dmd2beta.zip > userid: customer > passwd: download7 > _______________________________________________ > dmd-beta mailing list > dmd-beta at puremagic.com > http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta > |
March 15, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Don Clugston | Yeah, I ran into that, too. I don't know what it does or how it's supposed to work, so I checked in the workaround you suggest.
Don Clugston wrote:
> This is an awesome release.
> One thing though -- the Phobos unittests don't pass. The unittest
> around socket.d 292 fails on Windows.
> Admittedly, the unittests failed on the previous release, too, but I
> don't think we should do it again. At the very least we should do
> something like:
>
> unittest
> {
> Protocol proto = new Protocol;
> + version(Windows) {
> + pragma(msg, " --- socket.d(" ~ __LINE__ ~ ") broken test ---");
> + } else {
> assert(proto.getProtocolByType(ProtocolType.TCP));
>
>
|
March 15, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter Bright | Doesn't concern the release directly, but I ran into it while testing and I don't think it's worth its own bugzilla issue. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/operatoroverloading.html#OpAssign "a op= b is rewritten as: a.opOpAssign!("op")(b)" is misleading. I deduced that op doesn't include "=" but it does. |
March 15, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Don Clugston | > One thing though -- the Phobos unittests don't pass. The unittest > around socket.d 292 fails on Windows. > Admittedly, the unittests failed on the previous release, too, but I > don't think we should do it again. At the very least we should do > something like: > For me, also these fail: D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(1186): Error: function std.random.rand is deprecated D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(169): Error: cannot evaluate primeFactorsOnly(100LU) at compile time D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(169): Error: static assert (primeFactorsOnly(100LU) == 10LU) is not evaluatable at compile time D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(171): Error: cannot evaluate primeFactorsOnly(11LU) at compile time D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(171): Error: static assert (primeFactorsOnly(11LU) == 11LU) is not evaluatable at compile time D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(172): Error: cannot evaluate primeFactorsOnly(622545LU) at compile time D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(172): Error: static assert (primeFactorsOnly(622545LU) == 1155LU) is not evaluatable at compile time D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(173): Error: cannot evaluate primeFactorsOnly(258LU) at compile time D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\random.d(173): Error: static assert (primeFactorsOnly(258LU) == 258LU) is not evaluatable at compile time --- std.regex(3318) broken test --- D:\dmd\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\string.d(4058): Error: function std.string.find is deprecated |
March 16, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter Bright | Third issue: Somebody messed up std.perf. Doesn't measure anything anymore. This is the new version, line 95: interval_t freq; if (QueryPerformanceFrequency(&freq)) sm_freq = freq; else sm_freq = 1000; sm_fn = &_qtc; sm_fn isn't assigned and the brackets aren't correct (right?) This is the old version: if(QueryPerformanceFrequency(&sm_freq)) { sm_fn = &_qpc; } else { sm_freq = 1000; sm_fn = &_qtc; } I don't even know why another variable is used. If QueryPerformanceFrequency succeeds, sm_freq is already set; else it gets overwritten in the else clause. |
March 16, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Trass3r | > I don't even know why another variable is used. If QueryPerformanceFrequency succeeds, sm_freq is already set; else it gets overwritten in the else clause. > Ah never mind. Cause it's now const and not an lvalue. The following is the corrected code. Tested it, works fine again: interval_t freq; if (QueryPerformanceFrequency(&freq)) { sm_freq = freq; sm_fn = &_qpc; } else { sm_freq = 1000; sm_fn = &_qtc; } |
March 15, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Trass3r |
Trass3r wrote:
> Doesn't concern the release directly, but I ran into it while testing and I don't think it's worth its own bugzilla issue.
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/operatoroverloading.html#OpAssign
>
> "a op= b
>
> is rewritten as:
> a.opOpAssign!("op")(b)"
>
> is misleading. I deduced that op doesn't include "=" but it does.
>
You're right. Will fix.
|
March 15, 2010 [dmd-beta] beta for dmd 2.042 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Trass3r |
Trass3r wrote:
> Third issue:
> Somebody messed up std.perf. Doesn't measure anything anymore.
>
That would be me. I failed to spot the difference between _qpc and _qtc and thought I'd "optimize" the code. Thanks for setting the code straight.
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation