July 12, 2014 Re: [dmd-beta] DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrej Mitrovic | On 7/12/14, 3:09 AM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > Pretty sure Brad already proved your stats tend to be wrong, so forget > the stats. How do you mean that? -- Andrei _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta |
July 12, 2014 Re: DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to David Nadlinger | On Saturday, 12 July 2014 at 00:13:47 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
> For convenience, the list of unresolved issues marked as regressions: https://issues.dlang.org/buglist.cgi?bug_severity=regression&resolution=---
>
> Seems like there is still quite a way to go until we can release RC1.
>
> David
David, I'm sure you are aware that list will never be empty. The last release lasted from mid November to 24 February and that list was never empty once during that entire time. The only way we will empty that list is to prevent people from submitting new regressions during a review.
When I checked the list yesterday the count was at 9: right now it is at 12. And at least on of those items on the list has been there since 2011.
The reality is that zero emphasis is place on regressions unless it's time for a release, and even then, only a few people pay attention to them. Everyone else just continue on in their happy world doing "what's important to them". You you cannot ask that anyone work on anything because if it's not important in their minds, they will not do it. They'd much rather sit around and biker about how you did it incorrectly. Which, in my opinion, is a huge wast of time and resource.
So I have some questions: What is the magic number that will trigger the release? What happens if we never reach that number? Do we just continue waiting for it or do we make a decision at some point that it's time? If so, how long do we wait? Is there one person who makes the decision, or is it decision automatic? If there is a person, who is it?
|
July 12, 2014 Re: DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrew Edwards | On 7/12/14, 4:31 PM, Andrew Edwards via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Saturday, 12 July 2014 at 00:13:47 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
>> For convenience, the list of unresolved issues marked as regressions:
>> https://issues.dlang.org/buglist.cgi?bug_severity=regression&resolution=---
>>
>> Seems like there is still quite a way to go until we can release RC1.
>>
>> David
>
> David, I'm sure you are aware that list will never be empty. The last release lasted from mid
> November to 24 February and that list was never empty once during that entire time. The only way we
> will empty that list is to prevent people from submitting new regressions during a review.
>
> When I checked the list yesterday the count was at 9: right now it is at 12. And at least on of
> those items on the list has been there since 2011.
>
> The reality is that zero emphasis is place on regressions unless it's time for a release, and even
> then, only a few people pay attention to them. Everyone else just continue on in their happy world
> doing "what's important to them". You you cannot ask that anyone work on anything because if it's
> not important in their minds, they will not do it. They'd much rather sit around and biker about how
> you did it incorrectly. Which, in my opinion, is a huge wast of time and resource.
>
> So I have some questions: What is the magic number that will trigger the release? What happens if we
> never reach that number? Do we just continue waiting for it or do we make a decision at some point
> that it's time? If so, how long do we wait? Is there one person who makes the decision, or is it
> decision automatic? If there is a person, who is it?
An important topic, certainly. But not for the announce newsgroup. Please continue this over on the beta list.
|
July 14, 2014 Re: DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrew Edwards | >
> LINUX
> ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.066.0-b3.linux.zip
I think something got wrong on building the 2.066.0-b3. The sources from dmd.2.066.0-b3.linux.zip are not the same with the tagged version 2.066.0-b3 in git (for dmd at least).
For example:
unzipped dmd2.066-b3/src/dmd/nogc.c:65
if (v && (v->storage_class & (STCmanifest | STCstatic)) == 0 && v->init)
git v2.066.0-b3 dmd/src/nogc.c:65
if (v && !(v->storage_class & STCmanifest) && !v->isDataseg() && v->init)
Maybe you should rebuild this or simply ignore -b3 and create a -b4.
Because of improper tagging, testing actual binaries of -b3 makes no sense.
|
July 14, 2014 Re: DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Dragos Carp | On Monday, 14 July 2014 at 11:57:33 UTC, Dragos Carp wrote: >> >> LINUX >> ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.066.0-b3.linux.zip > > I think something got wrong on building the 2.066.0-b3. The sources from dmd.2.066.0-b3.linux.zip are not the same with the tagged version 2.066.0-b3 in git (for dmd at least). > > For example: > unzipped dmd2.066-b3/src/dmd/nogc.c:65 > if (v && (v->storage_class & (STCmanifest | STCstatic)) == 0 && v->init) > git v2.066.0-b3 dmd/src/nogc.c:65 > if (v && !(v->storage_class & STCmanifest) && !v->isDataseg() && v->init) > > > Maybe you should rebuild this or simply ignore -b3 and create a -b4. > > Because of improper tagging, testing actual binaries of -b3 makes no sense. http://forum.dlang.org/post/yavpusxgxwgbaepctjty@forum.dlang.org |
July 14, 2014 Re: DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Dicebot Attachments:
| I've been running beta2, and I noticed that class debugging isn't working. There was a discussion some time back about how class members weren't evaluated correctly in Win64, and it was said that it was fixed in master. I was excited and patiently awaiting the release. Can anyone who knows about this stuff comment? On 14 July 2014 22:00, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-announce < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote: > On Monday, 14 July 2014 at 11:57:33 UTC, Dragos Carp wrote: > >> >>> LINUX >>> ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.066.0-b3.linux.zip >>> >> >> I think something got wrong on building the 2.066.0-b3. The sources from dmd.2.066.0-b3.linux.zip are not the same with the tagged version 2.066.0-b3 in git (for dmd at least). >> >> For example: >> unzipped dmd2.066-b3/src/dmd/nogc.c:65 >> if (v && (v->storage_class & (STCmanifest | STCstatic)) == 0 && >> v->init) >> git v2.066.0-b3 dmd/src/nogc.c:65 >> if (v && !(v->storage_class & STCmanifest) && !v->isDataseg() && >> v->init) >> >> >> Maybe you should rebuild this or simply ignore -b3 and create a -b4. >> >> Because of improper tagging, testing actual binaries of -b3 makes no sense. >> > > http://forum.dlang.org/post/yavpusxgxwgbaepctjty@forum.dlang.org > |
July 14, 2014 Re: DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Manu |
On 14.07.2014 16:17, Manu via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> I've been running beta2, and I noticed that class debugging isn't
> working. There was a discussion some time back about how class members
> weren't evaluated correctly in Win64, and it was said that it was fixed
> in master.
> I was excited and patiently awaiting the release.
>
> Can anyone who knows about this stuff comment?
>
You have to use -gc instead of -g to enable the '.' to '@' translation inside class names.
|
July 15, 2014 Re: DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Rainer Schuetze Attachments:
| On 15 July 2014 07:37, Rainer Schuetze via Digitalmars-d-announce < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote: > > > On 14.07.2014 16:17, Manu via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > >> I've been running beta2, and I noticed that class debugging isn't >> working. There was a discussion some time back about how class members >> weren't evaluated correctly in Win64, and it was said that it was fixed >> in master. >> I was excited and patiently awaiting the release. >> >> Can anyone who knows about this stuff comment? >> >> > You have to use -gc instead of -g to enable the '.' to '@' translation inside class names. > Shouldn't that be the default then? It's no good not being able to view class members... Are you sure that's the problem? If I inspect a class, it shows a grid populated with the proper number of members, but the member names are blank and the values are blank too. Occasionally, if there are many members, the first 10 or so are blank, but then the rest display properly from there down. It's very strange... you haven't experienced this? If the problem is as you say, I'm surprised that it would occasionally work past the first 10 members or so... |
July 15, 2014 Re: DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Manu | On 15.07.2014 04:06, Manu via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 15 July 2014 07:37, Rainer Schuetze via Digitalmars-d-announce > <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com > <mailto:digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com>> wrote: > > > > On 14.07.2014 16:17, Manu via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > I've been running beta2, and I noticed that class debugging isn't > working. There was a discussion some time back about how class > members > weren't evaluated correctly in Win64, and it was said that it > was fixed > in master. > I was excited and patiently awaiting the release. > > Can anyone who knows about this stuff comment? > > > You have to use -gc instead of -g to enable the '.' to '@' > translation inside class names. > > > Shouldn't that be the default then? It's no good not being able to view > class members... Please convince Walter, I was unsuccessful. In his favor, there are debug engines that understand type names with '.', like mago. It would be strange to burden these with '@'. I guess I'll have to add some "best option for selected debug engine" to Visual D, though. > > Are you sure that's the problem? If I inspect a class, it shows a grid > populated with the proper number of members, but the member names are > blank and the values are blank too. > Occasionally, if there are many members, the first 10 or so are blank, > but then the rest display properly from there down. It's very strange... > you haven't experienced this? > If the problem is as you say, I'm surprised that it would occasionally > work past the first 10 members or so... That was exactly my experience, too, and led to the workaround (this was long before Win64 support, though). If there is a better solution, please speak up ;-) |
July 15, 2014 Re: [dmd-beta] DMD v2.066.0-b3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Kenji Hara | On 07/12/2014 04:00 AM, Kenji Hara via dmd-beta wrote: > To Andrew Edwards: > > I think you made wrong beta3 release, because v2.066.0-b3 tag is not on > the HEAD of each repos. > > For example, in dmd repository: Yes, it's the same as v2.066.0-b2, let's please redo it. _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation