Hi D community!

I'm here again, to describe what I've done during the fourth week of Symmetry Autumn of Code.

## Finishing the patch split

I'm happy to announce the full list of patches since the split:

- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111414
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111415
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111416
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111417
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111419
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111420
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111421
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111422
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111423
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111424
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111425
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111426
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111428
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111429
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111430
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111431
- https://reviews.llvm.org/D111432

This includes some little changes and it already have a ton of discussion! Some things are little disappointing and other somewhat rigid, in my point of view, since some patches are "too atomic" according to the reviewers. Some other stuff, however I totally understand, since it increases the overall LLVM code quality, even though being nit picking. I'm going to try to circumvent the issues and strive to push this forward as much as I can.

## Reflected GCC Patches

By reading the code twice, during the split, I found out some other stuff considered interesting to change on the GCC side, so I made some patches:

- Usage of distinguishable tuple(), instead of wrong templated
Tuple!():
  https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/581577.html
- Write distinguishable variadics and add missing tests to the test
suite:
  https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/581574.html
- Add test cases for missing coverage tests:
  https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/581588.html
and
  https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/581590.html

I also generically answered previously submitted patches and resubmit some malformed/wrong patches I made, with some help by Iain.

## Announcement on the `llvm-dev` mailing list

I announced the D demangler change into llvm-dev mailing list, as requested by LLVM reviewers. If you want to interact and discuss there, feel free to do it so: https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-October/153267.html

## Minor updates on GCC bugzilla

I added this missing bugzilla report:
- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102702

Since Eric Gallager added me to CC list for various fuzzing issues to GCC demangler, I decided to create an issue about the time complexity problem, https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102732 , similar to what was reported by c++ demangler (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80002).

## What's next?

Next week I'm going to keep an eye on the patches and fix the suggested changes, as usual. About the next milestone, I already have some drafts about things to look at and differences between compilers DWARF generation. I also have an hint of how to implement it, so probably I'm going to work on some draft implementation. Because the demangler is already ported/implemented, just reviewing is necessary, I think I can move forward with a draft implementation of the next milestone, although this is something I need to discuss with my mentor. On the meanwhile, I made my TODO list open and automatically deployed, at least daily, so you can see what I'm doing during the week [here](tasks.lsferreira.net) .

You can also read this on my blog: https://lsferreira.net/posts/d-saoc-2021-04

-- 
Sincerely,
Luís Ferreira @ lsferreira.net

The link for your blog doesn't work

I get the following error:

``ipfs resolve -r /ipns/lsferreira.net/posts/d-saoc-2021-04: no link named "d-saoc-2021-04" under bafybeiawky3bqfnl4xpp67iim3or3luhvim2zvpkw2sni5snz274qpr7um``

On Thu, 2021-10-14 at 16:46 +0000, russhy via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> lsferreira.net/posts/d-saoc-2021-04

Sorry, I pushed the post with the wrong creation date and it was marked as a pending/draft post, wrongly. Should be good now!

-- 
Sincerely,
Luís Ferreira @ lsferreira.net