On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 11:21:31 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 07:34:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 2/12/2019 7:01 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>> This one looks like it might be related, but it doesn't seem to be a true duplicate:
>>> 
>>> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15075
>>
>> Related issues can be added to the "See Also" thing on the Bugzilla page.
>
> Thanks you, Walter.
>
> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/9357

Lol, how many other bugs we will face before one will comprehend that dmd's codegen is not suitable for an «official» compiler implementation.

On Thursday, 14 February 2019 at 18:11:28 UTC, Temtaime wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 11:21:31 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 07:34:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> On 2/12/2019 7:01 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>>> This one looks like it might be related, but it doesn't seem to be a true duplicate:
>>>> 
>>>> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15075
>>>
>>> Related issues can be added to the "See Also" thing on the Bugzilla page.
>>
>> Thanks you, Walter.
>>
>> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/9357
>
> Lol, how many other bugs we will face before one will comprehend that dmd's codegen is not suitable for an «official» compiler implementation.

I don't know how many but this morning i've seen another nice one in bugzilla :
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19437

Hopefully nobody makes 32-bit apps anymore.

On 14.02.19 21:36, Basile B. wrote:
> I don't know how many but this morning i've seen another nice one in bugzilla :
> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19437
> 
> Hopefully nobody makes 32-bit apps anymore.

Change the type to `real` and it fails on x64, too. Issue was a duplicate of <https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18573>. Known for about a year.

On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 09:59:27PM +0100, ag0aep6g via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 14.02.19 21:36, Basile B. wrote:
> > I don't know how many but this morning i've seen another nice one in
> > bugzilla :
> > https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19437
> > 
> > Hopefully nobody makes 32-bit apps anymore.
> 
> Change the type to `real` and it fails on x64, too. Issue was a duplicate of <https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18573>. Known for about a year.

Maybe if we make enough noise about it, it would get fixed in the near future?


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.

On 14.02.19 22:28, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> Maybe if we make enough noise about it, it would get fixed in the near
> future?

Maybe. But is that how bugs should be prioritized? Be the most annoying and your thing gets fixed first (or at all)? That's not a game I want to play.

On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:10:06PM +0100, ag0aep6g via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 14.02.19 22:28, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > Maybe if we make enough noise about it, it would get fixed in the near future?
> 
> Maybe. But is that how bugs should be prioritized? Be the most annoying and your thing gets fixed first (or at all)? That's not a game I want to play.

No.  I think the problem here is that there are far too many bugs to work on and far too few people working on them, that if you want timely results, you pretty much have to bring it to people's attention.


T

-- 
MS Windows: 64-bit rehash of 32-bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1-bit of competition.

On Thursday, 14 February 2019 at 21:28:13 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 09:59:27PM +0100, ag0aep6g via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On 14.02.19 21:36, Basile B. wrote:
>> > I don't know how many but this morning i've seen another nice one in
>> > bugzilla :
>> > https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19437
>> > 
>> > Hopefully nobody makes 32-bit apps anymore.
>> 
>> Change the type to `real` and it fails on x64, too. Issue was a duplicate of <https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18573>. Known for about a year.
>
> Maybe if we make enough noise about it, it would get fixed in the near future?
>
>
> T

Maybe a bit of RE at the machine code level can help to target the issue and to refine the bug report. I believe that the issue of the OP was quickly fixed because of that kind of work.

It was really easier to look at the disasm rather than trying to understand the backend end and put some printf everywhere.

On Thursday, 14 February 2019 at 22:25:19 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:10:06PM +0100, ag0aep6g via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On 14.02.19 22:28, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> > Maybe if we make enough noise about it, it would get fixed in the near future?
>> 
>> Maybe. But is that how bugs should be prioritized? Be the most annoying and your thing gets fixed first (or at all)? That's not a game I want to play.
>
> No.  I think the problem here is that there are far too many bugs to work on and far too few people working on them, that if you want timely results, you pretty much have to bring it to people's attention.
>

Proven right. The bug has been fixed rapidly.

On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 11:21:31 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 07:34:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 2/12/2019 7:01 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>> This one looks like it might be related, but it doesn't seem to be a true duplicate:
>>> 
>>> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15075
>>
>> Related issues can be added to the "See Also" thing on the Bugzilla page.
>
> Thanks you, Walter.
>
> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/9357

Is this going to make it into a v2.084 point release (presumably v2.084.2)?  If so, is there an ETA for this release?

Asking because I want to confirm if, given this regression, it's better to use v2.084.1 in the snap package, or to release v2.084.0 and wait for the .2 point release.

On Friday, 15 February 2019 at 11:09:28 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 11:21:31 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 07:34:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> On 2/12/2019 7:01 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>>> This one looks like it might be related, but it doesn't seem to be a true duplicate:
>>>> 
>>>> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15075
>>>
>>> Related issues can be added to the "See Also" thing on the Bugzilla page.
>>
>> Thanks you, Walter.
>>
>> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/9357
>
> Is this going to make it into a v2.084 point release (presumably v2.084.2)?  If so, is there an ETA for this release?
>
> Asking because I want to confirm if, given this regression, it's better to use v2.084.1 in the snap package, or to release v2.084.0 and wait for the .2 point release.

As explained on Slack, there very likely will be no v2.084.2 as the master/stable branch-off for 2.085.0 should happen this weekend and there's only limited manpower for releases (aka Martin).

Thus, is best to use v2.084.1 for now.