[Issue 918] New: Template order matter, version block change something with typedef, and another template bug.

[Issue 918] (D1 only): Template order matter, version block change something with typedef, and another template bug.

Jan 25, 2010

Jan 21, 2012

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=918 Summary: Template order matter, version block change something with typedef, and another template bug. Product: D Version: 1.004 Platform: PC OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: bugzilla@digitalmars.com ReportedBy: baryluk@mpi.int.pl import std.stdio; typedef int num = 42; version (A) { void pow(alias b)() { writefln("full ", b); } void pow(num b)() { writefln("num ", b); } void pow(int b)() { writefln("int ", b); } } else version (B) { void pow(num b)() { writefln("num ", b); } void pow(alias b)() { writefln("full ", b); } void pow(int b)() { writefln("int ", b); } } else version (C) { void pow(num b)() { writefln("num ", b); } void pow(alias b)() { writefln("full ", b); } } else { static assert(false, "Provide version"); } void main() { num wyk = 22; pow!(wyk); } /* A: full 22 B: num 0 (why 0?, should be 22, eventually 42) C: ./po.d(22): template instance pow!(wyk) matches more than one template declaration, pow(num b) and pow(alias b) ./po.d(22): Error: import has no effect in expression (pow!(wyk)) Note: in A, B template "int" isn't used! So probably 3 bugs. When compiled without version block (leaving version B): num 22 */ --

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=918 thomas-dloop@kuehne.cn changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |spec OS/Version|Linux |All ------- Comment #1 from thomas-dloop@kuehne.cn 2007-04-05 11:33 ------- http://digitalmars.com/d/template.html > > Determine which is more specialized is done the same way as the C++ partial ordering rules. > I'm unsure how C++'s rules would apply to the alias parameters and thus the specialization but I doubt that D shoud behave dependent on the template declaration order. --

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=918 baryluk@smp.if.uj.edu.pl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|1.004 |1.039 ------- Comment #2 from baryluk@smp.if.uj.edu.pl 2009-04-02 08:38 ------- Just tested in newer compiler, same behaviour. (1.004, and 1.039) --

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=918 matti.niemenmaa+dbugzilla@iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|1.039 |1.004 ------- Comment #3 from matti.niemenmaa+dbugzilla@iki.fi 2009-04-02 13:52 ------- Please keep the version setting at the oldest, not the newest, known version which exhibits the bug. --

November 19, 2009

[Issue 918] Template order matter, version block change something with typedef, and another template bug.

Posted by Witold Baryluk
in reply to d-bugmail

Permalink

Witold Baryluk

Posted in reply to d-bugmail

Permalink

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=918



--- Comment #4 from Witold Baryluk <baryluk@smp.if.uj.edu.pl> 2009-11-18 21:25:29 PST ---
I recently retested this code in DMD 2.032:


a918.d:
-----
import std.stdio;

typedef int num = 42;

version (A) {
    void pow(alias b)() {     writefln("alias %d", b); }
    void pow(num b)() {    writefln("num %d", b); }
    void pow(int b)() {    writefln("int %d", b); }
} else version (B) {
    void pow(num b)() {    writefln("num %d", b); }
    void pow(alias b)() {     writefln("alias %d", b); }
    void pow(int b)() {    writefln("int %d", b); }
} else version (C) {
    void pow(num b)() {    writefln("num %d", b); }
    void pow(alias b)() {     writefln("alias %d", b); }
} else {
    static assert(false, "Provide version");
}


void main() {
    num wyk = 22;
writeln("calling num wyk=22?");
    pow!(wyk)();

writeln("calling int=4?");
    pow!(4)();

    uint x = 333;
writeln("calling alias=x=333?");
    pow!(x)();
}
-----

It looks it behaves much better than original bug report:

------
baryluk@sredniczarny:/tmp$ dmd2 -version=A -w a918.d ; ./a918
calling num wyk=22?
num -1077524476
calling int=4?
int 4
calling alias=x=333?
alias 333
baryluk@sredniczarny:/tmp$ dmd2 -version=B -w a918.d ; ./a918
calling num wyk=22?
num -1081977116
calling int=4?
int 4
calling alias=x=333?
alias 333
baryluk@sredniczarny:/tmp$ dmd2 -version=C -w a918.d ; ./a918
calling num wyk=22?
num -1076793804
calling int=4?
alias 4
calling alias=x=333?
alias 333
baryluk@sredniczarny:/tmp$
-----

We have the same behaviour regardles of version. In version C int properly uses "alias" template. Order of templates doesn't metter. Removing or leaving "version" blocks, doesn't change behaviour.


But here we also see regression. num is not passed correctly. Even after removing "version" blocks, and leaving only "B" part. It also doesn't print any "0" or "42", or desired "22", but some random negative number.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=918 --- Comment #5 from Witold Baryluk <baryluk@smp.if.uj.edu.pl> 2010-01-24 20:44:41 PST --- I tested it today on 2.039 and regression dissapered, now all 3 versions give exactl the same correct answers: $ dmd2 -version=B -w a918.d ; ./a918 calling num wyk=22? num 22 calling int=4? int 4 calling alias=x=333? alias 333 $ It can be closed now I think, but still I will want to test it in DMD 1.x. Anyone knows what changes in compiler possibly made all this fixes, regression and fixes? I can try historical version and check which have what behaviour. I would not want to close error because it dissapered by random chance :) -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=918 Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |clugdbug@yahoo.com.au Summary|Template order matter, |(D1 only): Template order |version block change |matter, version block |something with typedef, and |change something with |another template bug. |typedef, and another | |template bug. --- Comment #6 from Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> 2010-01-25 01:12:18 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) > I tested it today on 2.039 and regression dissapered, now all 3 versions give exactl the same correct answers: > > $ dmd2 -version=B -w a918.d ; ./a918 > calling num wyk=22? > num 22 > calling int=4? > int 4 > calling alias=x=333? > alias 333 > $ > > It can be closed now I think, but still I will want to test it in DMD 1.x. > > Anyone knows what changes in compiler possibly made all this fixes, regression and fixes? I can try historical version and check which have what behaviour. I would not want to close error because it dissapered by random chance :) It was fixed in 2.033,2.034, or 2.035 (works in 2.035, fails in 2.032). Many compiler structural problems were fixed around that time, so we can expect many bugs to be fixed. It still fails in D1, so cannot be closed yet. But I've put 'D1 only' in the title. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=918 Walter Bright <bugzilla@digitalmars.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords|spec | CC| |bugzilla@digitalmars.com --- Comment #7 from Walter Bright <bugzilla@digitalmars.com> 2012-01-21 11:45:02 PST --- Not a spec issue. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Forums