I'm working on that now, so please no more changes unless there's some disaster. Thanks!

On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Walter Bright wrote:

> I'm working on that now, so please no more changes unless there's some disaster. Thanks!

It looks like from the startsWith thread, that the problem is at the compiler level regression.  Have you followed that issue and if so, found a fix?  I haven't seen a dmd submit with a fix yet.

Just making sure we've handled all the discovered issues.

Later,
Brad

Brad Roberts wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Walter Bright wrote:
>
> 
>> I'm working on that now, so please no more changes unless there's some
>> disaster. Thanks!
>> 
>
> It looks like from the startsWith thread, that the problem is at the compiler level regression.  Have you followed that issue and if so, found a fix?  I haven't seen a dmd submit with a fix yet.
>
> Just making sure we've handled all the discovered issues.
>
> 

As far as I know, nobody has figured out where the problem is.

On 12 June 2010 04:18, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
>
> Brad Roberts wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I'm working on that now, so please no more changes unless there's some disaster. Thanks!
>>>
>>
>> It looks like from the startsWith thread, that the problem is at the compiler level regression. ?Have you followed that issue and if so, found a fix? ?I haven't seen a dmd submit with a fix yet.
>>
>> Just making sure we've handled all the discovered issues.
>>
>>
>
> As far as I know, nobody has figured out where the problem is.

The original startWith() bug was a Phobos change, which is now fixed. The CustomFloat bug has been fixed. Is there another regression?

On 6/11/2010 9:40 PM, Don Clugston wrote:
> On 12 June 2010 04:18, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>
>> Brad Roberts wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm working on that now, so please no more changes unless there's some disaster. Thanks!
>>>
>>> It looks like from the startsWith thread, that the problem is at the compiler level regression.  Have you followed that issue and if so, found a fix?  I haven't seen a dmd submit with a fix yet.
>>>
>>> Just making sure we've handled all the discovered issues.
>>
>> As far as I know, nobody has figured out where the problem is.
> 
> The original startWith() bug was a Phobos change, which is now fixed. The CustomFloat bug has been fixed. Is there another regression? _______________________________________________

The attached email is the last one I saw on the startsWith thread.  It was in the dmd-beta list earlier today.

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario at gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [dmd-beta] dmd 1.062 and 2.047 beta
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:30:07 +0200
Size: 4733
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/phobos/attachments/20100612/80b8972e/attachment.mht>

Which is exactly what I said about 6 hours ago and Rainer said 14 hours ago. :)

On 6/12/2010 1:18 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Looks like a compiler problem.
> 
> Andrei
> 
> Brad Roberts wrote:
>> On 6/11/2010 9:40 PM, Don Clugston wrote:
>>> On 12 June 2010 04:18, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>>> Brad Roberts wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>>> I'm working on that now, so please no more changes unless there's
>>>>>> some
>>>>>> disaster. Thanks!
>>>>> It looks like from the startsWith thread, that the problem is at the
>>>>> compiler level regression.  Have you followed that issue and if so,
>>>>> found a
>>>>> fix?  I haven't seen a dmd submit with a fix yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just making sure we've handled all the discovered issues.
>>>> As far as I know, nobody has figured out where the problem is.
>>> The original startWith() bug was a Phobos change, which is now fixed. The CustomFloat bug has been fixed. Is there another regression? _______________________________________________
>>
>> The attached email is the last one I saw on the startsWith thread.  It
>> was in
>> the dmd-beta list earlier today.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Subject:
>> Re: [dmd-beta] dmd 1.062 and 2.047 beta
>> From:
>> Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario at gmx.de>
>> Date:
>> Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:30:07 +0200
>> To:
>> Discuss the dmd beta releases for D <dmd-beta at puremagic.com>
>>
>> To:
>> Discuss the dmd beta releases for D <dmd-beta at puremagic.com>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've tried to untangle the startsWith code, and here's the minimal test case I could come up with so far:
>>
>> ///////////////////////
>> template binaryFunImpl(bool b)
>> {
>>        template Body()
>>        {
>>            static assert(b);
>>            alias bool BodyType;
>>        }
>>        alias Body!().BodyType  ReturnType;  // line 9
>> }
>>
>> uint startsWith(A)(A a) if (is(binaryFunImpl!(true ).ReturnType)) {
>> return 1; }
>> uint startsWith(A)(A a) if (is(binaryFunImpl!(false).ReturnType)) {
>> return 0; }  // line 13
>>
>> const uint var = startsWith(1);
>> ///////////////////////
>> dmd produces:
>>
>> test.d(6): Error: static assert  (b) is false
>> test.d(9):        instantiated from here: Body!()
>> test.d(13):        instantiated from here: binaryFunImpl!(false)
>>
>> The error does not show up if var is not const. Also, dmd 2.032 to 2.045 do not produce this error (2.046 fails), so it must be some compiler regression.
>>
>> As it seems, the compile time evaluation of startsWith uses the wrong specialization. Maybe, it is just not gagging error output?
>>
>> Any other ideas? I have not yet dived too deep into the template code of the compiler, but if nobody has a better clue (and time), I can give it a try.
>>
>> Rainer
>>
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Thanks. It may take a while before I can tend to this. Could someone else look at it?
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>> On 06/10/2010 12:53 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
>>>> Sorry, but it still doesn't work. The error occurs when the expression
>>>> is evaluated at compile time, so the code added to the unittest does
>>>> not
>>>> cover the issue.
>>>>
>>>> Rainer
>>>>
>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>> Apologies. svn up should fix it, and bring some more goodies too :o).
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrei
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06/10/2010 10:14 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
>>>>>> const bool fails = startsWith("ab", "a");
>>>>> _______________________________________________

Looks like a compiler problem.

Andrei

Brad Roberts wrote:
> On 6/11/2010 9:40 PM, Don Clugston wrote:
>> On 12 June 2010 04:18, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>> Brad Roberts wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>> I'm working on that now, so please no more changes unless there's some disaster. Thanks!
>>>> It looks like from the startsWith thread, that the problem is at the compiler level regression.  Have you followed that issue and if so, found a fix?  I haven't seen a dmd submit with a fix yet.
>>>>
>>>> Just making sure we've handled all the discovered issues.
>>> As far as I know, nobody has figured out where the problem is.
>> The original startWith() bug was a Phobos change, which is now fixed. The CustomFloat bug has been fixed. Is there another regression? _______________________________________________
> 
> The attached email is the last one I saw on the startsWith thread.  It was in the dmd-beta list earlier today.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Subject:
> Re: [dmd-beta] dmd 1.062 and 2.047 beta
> From:
> Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario at gmx.de>
> Date:
> Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:30:07 +0200
> To:
> Discuss the dmd beta releases for D <dmd-beta at puremagic.com>
> 
> To:
> Discuss the dmd beta releases for D <dmd-beta at puremagic.com>
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I've tried to untangle the startsWith code, and here's the minimal test case I could come up with so far:
> 
> ///////////////////////
> template binaryFunImpl(bool b)
> {
>        template Body()
>        {
>            static assert(b);
>            alias bool BodyType;
>        }
>        alias Body!().BodyType  ReturnType;  // line 9
> }
> 
> uint startsWith(A)(A a) if (is(binaryFunImpl!(true ).ReturnType)) {
> return 1; }
> uint startsWith(A)(A a) if (is(binaryFunImpl!(false).ReturnType)) {
> return 0; }  // line 13
> 
> const uint var = startsWith(1);
> ///////////////////////
> dmd produces:
> 
> test.d(6): Error: static assert  (b) is false
> test.d(9):        instantiated from here: Body!()
> test.d(13):        instantiated from here: binaryFunImpl!(false)
> 
> The error does not show up if var is not const. Also, dmd 2.032 to 2.045 do not produce this error (2.046 fails), so it must be some compiler regression.
> 
> As it seems, the compile time evaluation of startsWith uses the wrong specialization. Maybe, it is just not gagging error output?
> 
> Any other ideas? I have not yet dived too deep into the template code of the compiler, but if nobody has a better clue (and time), I can give it a try.
> 
> Rainer
> 
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Thanks. It may take a while before I can tend to this. Could someone else look at it?
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>> On 06/10/2010 12:53 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
>>> Sorry, but it still doesn't work. The error occurs when the expression is evaluated at compile time, so the code added to the unittest does not cover the issue.
>>>
>>> Rainer
>>>
>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> Apologies. svn up should fix it, and bring some more goodies too :o).
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>>
>>>> On 06/10/2010 10:14 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
>>>>> const bool fails = startsWith("ab", "a");
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dmd-beta mailing list
>>>> dmd-beta at puremagic.com
>>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmd-beta mailing list
>>> dmd-beta at puremagic.com
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos