First beta for the 2.078.2 patch release.

Contains a major regression fix for hashtable array comparison and comes with  more reliable retries and fallback mirror usage for dub (https://github.com/dlang/dub/pull/1339).

http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.078.2.html

Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org

- -Martin

On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 16:01:18 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> First beta for the 2.078.2 patch release.
>
> Contains a major regression fix for hashtable array comparison and comes with  more reliable retries and fallback mirror usage for dub (https://github.com/dlang/dub/pull/1339).
>
> http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.078.2.html
>
> Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org
>
> - -Martin

Changelog page returns a 404

On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 17:32:09 UTC, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 16:01:18 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
>> First beta for the 2.078.2 patch release.
>>
>> Contains a major regression fix for hashtable array comparison and comes with  more reliable retries and fallback mirror usage for dub (https://github.com/dlang/dub/pull/1339).
>>
>> http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.078.2.html
>>
>> Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org
>>
>> - -Martin
>
> Changelog page returns a 404

It got lost in the merge queue - https://github.com/dlang/dlang.org/pull/2158

I just merged it. It should be up in a few minutes.

On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 18:21:22 UTC, Seb wrote:
> On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 17:32:09 UTC, Andrew Benton wrote:
>> On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 16:01:18 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
>>> First beta for the 2.078.2 patch release.
>>>
>>> Contains a major regression fix for hashtable array comparison and comes with  more reliable retries and fallback mirror usage for dub (https://github.com/dlang/dub/pull/1339).
>>>
>>> http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.078.2.html
>>>
>>> Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org
>>>
>>> - -Martin
>>
>> Changelog page returns a 404
>
> It got lost in the merge queue - https://github.com/dlang/dlang.org/pull/2158
>
> I just merged it. It should be up in a few minutes.

Wouldn't it be good to include a fix for errors like produced by int.min assigned to a variable (https://forum.dlang.org/post/p4l7kt$80d$1@digitalmars.com) in a point release like this?

A. Corbi

On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 08:34:32 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
> On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 18:21:22 UTC, Seb wrote:
>> On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 17:32:09 UTC, Andrew Benton wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 16:01:18 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
>>>> First beta for the 2.078.2 patch release.
>>>>
>>>> Contains a major regression fix for hashtable array comparison and comes with  more reliable retries and fallback mirror usage for dub (https://github.com/dlang/dub/pull/1339).
>>>>
>>>> http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.078.2.html
>>>>
>>>> Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org
>>>>
>>>> - -Martin
>>>
>>> Changelog page returns a 404
>>
>> It got lost in the merge queue - https://github.com/dlang/dlang.org/pull/2158
>>
>> I just merged it. It should be up in a few minutes.
>
> Wouldn't it be good to include a fix for errors like produced by int.min assigned to a variable (https://forum.dlang.org/post/p4l7kt$80d$1@digitalmars.com) in a point release like this?
>
> A. Corbi

No, while I understand that you would like this to be fixed, this change might be disruptive - you never know on what weird behavior people rely. Anything potentially breaking existing code can't be part of a patch release.

Also AFAICT no one has submitted a PR to fix the issue you referenced, so it's a hypothetical question (for now).

On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 09:29:15 UTC, Seb wrote:
> On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 08:34:32 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
>> On Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 18:21:22 UTC, Seb wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Wouldn't it be good to include a fix for errors like produced by int.min assigned to a variable (https://forum.dlang.org/post/p4l7kt$80d$1@digitalmars.com) in a point release like this?
>>
>> A. Corbi
>
> No, while I understand that you would like this to be fixed, this change might be disruptive - you never know on what weird behavior people rely. Anything potentially breaking existing code can't be part of a patch release.
>
> Also AFAICT no one has submitted a PR to fix the issue you referenced, so it's a hypothetical question (for now).

Thanks Seb, that makes sense.

A. Corbi

On 2/2/18 4:29 AM, Seb wrote:
> On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 08:34:32 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:

>> Wouldn't it be good to include a fix for errors like produced by int.min assigned to a variable (https://forum.dlang.org/post/p4l7kt$80d$1@digitalmars.com) in a point release like this?
> 
> No, while I understand that you would like this to be fixed, this change might be disruptive - you never know on what weird behavior people rely. Anything potentially breaking existing code can't be part of a patch release.

In some cases, yes, we need to have a deprecation period as people may depend on the behavior.

In this case, however, the codegen is simply wrong. It can be fixed immediately. I would hazard to guess that nobody is depending on int.min being greater than 0.

> Also AFAICT no one has submitted a PR to fix the issue you referenced, so it's a hypothetical question (for now).

I would suggest to would-be fixers, just do the correct thing that may be less performant, and we can worry about optimizing later (and add a unit test of course!). There is nothing worse than a compiler that doesn't emit the code you expect it to.

-Steve

thanks @aG0aep6G for this PR https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/7841 to fix it.
this should be in point release because:
* ldc2 has correct behavior
* the bug disappears with `-O`
so the argument that ppl would rely on it is moot


On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:37 AM, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 2/2/18 4:29 AM, Seb wrote:
>>
>> On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 08:34:32 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
>
>
>>> Wouldn't it be good to include a fix for errors like produced by int.min assigned to a variable (https://forum.dlang.org/post/p4l7kt$80d$1@digitalmars.com) in a point release like this?
>>
>>
>> No, while I understand that you would like this to be fixed, this change might be disruptive - you never know on what weird behavior people rely. Anything potentially breaking existing code can't be part of a patch release.
>
>
> In some cases, yes, we need to have a deprecation period as people may depend on the behavior.
>
> In this case, however, the codegen is simply wrong. It can be fixed immediately. I would hazard to guess that nobody is depending on int.min being greater than 0.
>
>> Also AFAICT no one has submitted a PR to fix the issue you referenced, so it's a hypothetical question (for now).
>
>
> I would suggest to would-be fixers, just do the correct thing that may be less performant, and we can worry about optimizing later (and add a unit test of course!). There is nothing worse than a compiler that doesn't emit the code you expect it to.
>
> -Steve

if necessary, to help with transition, one could add a hidden flag `-log_when_issue_18315_occurred` that would log stacktrace (or maybe user defined function) when hitting this condition at runtime:

```
void main(){ fun(int.min); }
void fun(int v){ writeln(v>0); }
```

dmd -log_when_issue_18315_occurred -run main.d WARNING_18315 at (shows stacktrace): old:true, new:false false


On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Timothee Cour <thelastmammoth@gmail.com> wrote:
> thanks @aG0aep6G for this PR https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/7841 to fix it.
> this should be in point release because:
> * ldc2 has correct behavior
> * the bug disappears with `-O`
> so the argument that ppl would rely on it is moot
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:37 AM, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
>> On 2/2/18 4:29 AM, Seb wrote:
>>>
>>> On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 08:34:32 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Wouldn't it be good to include a fix for errors like produced by int.min assigned to a variable (https://forum.dlang.org/post/p4l7kt$80d$1@digitalmars.com) in a point release like this?
>>>
>>>
>>> No, while I understand that you would like this to be fixed, this change might be disruptive - you never know on what weird behavior people rely. Anything potentially breaking existing code can't be part of a patch release.
>>
>>
>> In some cases, yes, we need to have a deprecation period as people may depend on the behavior.
>>
>> In this case, however, the codegen is simply wrong. It can be fixed immediately. I would hazard to guess that nobody is depending on int.min being greater than 0.
>>
>>> Also AFAICT no one has submitted a PR to fix the issue you referenced, so it's a hypothetical question (for now).
>>
>>
>> I would suggest to would-be fixers, just do the correct thing that may be less performant, and we can worry about optimizing later (and add a unit test of course!). There is nothing worse than a compiler that doesn't emit the code you expect it to.
>>
>> -Steve