http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd1beta.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd2beta.zip

Remaining regressions:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

What is the status of bug 5570 ("64 bit C ABI not followed for passing
structs and complex numbers as function parameters")?
There have been a lot of commits related to it, how much still needs to be done?
In case anyone has forgotten, that bug was the reason why we didn't
release 1.075 six weeks ago.

On 30 July 2012 05:35, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd1beta.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd2beta.zip
>
> Remaining regressions:
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 7/30/2012 1:05 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
> What is the status of bug 5570 ("64 bit C ABI not followed for passing
> structs and complex numbers as function parameters")?
> There have been a lot of commits related to it, how much still needs to be done?
> In case anyone has forgotten, that bug was the reason why we didn't
> release 1.075 six weeks ago.
>

It works for integral types only, and for floating point types only. It doesn't work if you have and int member and a float member.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 30 July 2012 10:54, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/30/2012 1:05 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
>>
>> What is the status of bug 5570 ("64 bit C ABI not followed for passing
>> structs and complex numbers as function parameters")?
>> There have been a lot of commits related to it, how much still needs to be
>> done?
>> In case anyone has forgotten, that bug was the reason why we didn't
>> release 1.075 six weeks ago.
>>
>
> It works for integral types only, and for floating point types only. It doesn't work if you have and int member and a float member.

Thanks, I'll add that comment to the bug report.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/30/2012 1:05 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
>>
>> What is the status of bug 5570 ("64 bit C ABI not followed for passing
>> structs and complex numbers as function parameters")?
>> There have been a lot of commits related to it, how much still needs to be
>> done?
>> In case anyone has forgotten, that bug was the reason why we didn't
>> release 1.075 six weeks ago.
>>
>
> It works for integral types only, and for floating point types only. It doesn't work if you have and int member and a float member.

Handling static arrays the same as structs, ABI-wise, is also not implemented yet.

David
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 7/30/12, David Nadlinger <code@klickverbot.at> wrote:
>> It works for integral types only, and for floating point types only. It doesn't work if you have and int member and a float member.
>
> Handling static arrays the same as structs, ABI-wise, is also not implemented yet.

How come this 64bit ABI is so hard to implement right? I'm just curious.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

So is  http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8428  officially a wontfix for this release?  (I know there's another bug report relevant to its underlying cause, but the changes made to std.algorithm still expose this and break existing code.)

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Andrej Mitrovic < andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 7/30/12, David Nadlinger <code@klickverbot.at> wrote:
> >> It works for integral types only, and for floating point types only. It doesn't work if you have and int member and a float member.
> >
> > Handling static arrays the same as structs, ABI-wise, is also not implemented yet.
>
> How come this 64bit ABI is so hard to implement right? I'm just curious.
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>

On 7/30/12 10:27 AM, David Simcha wrote:
> So is http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8428  officially a
> wontfix for this release?

I think it's quite important we fix that one and its ilk.

Andrei

_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 30 July 2012 16:28, Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei@erdani.com> wrote:
> On 7/30/12 10:27 AM, David Simcha wrote:
>>
>> So is http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8428  officially a wontfix for this release?
>
>
> I think it's quite important we fix that one and its ilk.

Bug 5939 seems to be a Phobos design flaw, and this one is probably related.
Unfortunately, I don't think we can fix the problem other than by
ripping all Voldemort types out of Phobos. Voldemort Types now appear
to be a concept that has tragically flawed semantics, and also has
poor performance (see
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5939). Removing them
would be a big change to make this late in a release cycle.
I don't know what to do here.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

2012/7/31 Don Clugston <dclugston@gmail.com>:
> On 30 July 2012 16:28, Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei@erdani.com> wrote:
>> On 7/30/12 10:27 AM, David Simcha wrote:
>>>
>>> So is http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8428  officially a wontfix for this release?
>>
>>
>> I think it's quite important we fix that one and its ilk.
>
> Bug 5939 seems to be a Phobos design flaw, and this one is probably related.
> Unfortunately, I don't think we can fix the problem other than by
> ripping all Voldemort types out of Phobos. Voldemort Types now appear
> to be a concept that has tragically flawed semantics, and also has
> poor performance (see
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5939). Removing them
> would be a big change to make this late in a release cycle.
> I don't know what to do here.

I completely agree. Voldemort type is a good idiom, but cannot control the context pointer.

I think it requires such enhancement for the compiler. http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8463

Kenji Hara
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta