== Quote from Jason E. Aten (j.e.aten@gmail.com)'s article
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 21:48:27 +0000, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> > == Quote from Jason E. Aten (j.e.aten@gmail.com)'s article
> >> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 19:25:24 +0100, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> >> > So far 4.5.2 works for me on XP. I've never tried it with DragonEgg though (first time I've heard about it too).
> >> I compiled both gdc and dragonegg together cleanly, which is nice that
> >> the patches they both required to gcc-4.5.2 don't conflict.  Not
> >> surprisingly, the resulting gdc doesn't work right away when using the
> >> dragonegg plugin. But that doesn't mean that this isn't a viable
> >> approach. jaten@afarm:~/dj$ gdc
> >> -fplugin=/opt/gdc-dragonegg/lib64/dragonegg.so vmacro.d
> >> cc1d: /home/jaten/pkg/dragonegg28/dragonegg-2.8/llvm-types.cpp:2066:
> >> const llvm::Type* TypeConverter::ConvertRECORD(tree_node*): Assertion
> >> `\ 0 && "Unable to decode struct fields."' failed.
> >
> > Out of curiousity, what does the struct look like?
> Hmm... I'm not sure on that one. Since I don't have any D structs in my v2.d code (below), the struct must be either one of the structs in std.stdio, or an implicitly created one. Either way, it's not the only issue, as the smallest program still yield a compiler crash.  It's the packed record that is having issues--I'll attach the section of the llvm- types.cpp code where the assert is firing.

First and last work here (then again, I'm prodding with a distribution-patched copy of dragonegg here). Second segfaults, but looks to be a problem with the plugin, rather than anything gdc could do.

Anyway, enough distraction for the time being. =)

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:33:07 +0000, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> First and last work here (then again, I'm prodding with a distribution-patched copy of dragonegg here). Second segfaults, but looks to be a problem with the plugin, rather than anything gdc could do.
> 
> Anyway, enough distraction for the time being. =)

=) good to know. There's a bunch of patches that I didn't apply, plus there's the svn head. my tests were all dragonegg 2.8 release. I'm holding back on going beyond 2.8 because they break all the debug info gen stuff (and replace it with expanded functionality).