www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - DMD 2.066 druntime looks broken...

reply "Iain Buclaw" <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
I don't know how DMD compiles rt.lifetime successfully.

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=_d_monitordelete

It should error with 'undefined identifier _d_monitordelete' - 
but no, that would be the obvious thing to do.

Iain
Sep 24 2014
next sibling parent Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On 24 September 2014 19:22, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:

 I don't know how DMD compiles rt.lifetime successfully.


Compiling object_.d and lifetime.d together vs. separate compilation.
Separate compilation loses again!
Sep 24 2014
prev sibling parent reply Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On 24 September 2014 19:22, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:

 I don't know how DMD compiles rt.lifetime successfully.

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=_d_monitordelete

 It should error with 'undefined identifier _d_monitordelete' - but no, that
 would be the obvious thing to do.

 Iain


Another weird one that has me for the moment stumped...

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=callWithStackShell%28scope&type=Code

callWithStackShell is marked nothrow, yet it's delegate parameter 'fn'
is not nothrow!

Bonus points, D inline assembly in a nothrow function.

Iain.
Sep 24 2014
next sibling parent "Joakim" <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 21:35:44 UTC, Iain Buclaw via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On 24 September 2014 19:22, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:

 I don't know how DMD compiles rt.lifetime successfully.

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=_d_monitordelete

 It should error with 'undefined identifier _d_monitordelete' - 
 but no, that
 would be the obvious thing to do.

 Iain


 Another weird one that has me for the moment stumped...

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=callWithStackShell%28scope&type=Code

 callWithStackShell is marked nothrow, yet it's delegate 
 parameter 'fn'
 is not nothrow!

 Bonus points, D inline assembly in a nothrow function.


I ran into this when compiling the 2.066 frontend with ldc HEAD 
for linux/arm, but not for linux/x86.  I figured it was some 
strange issue with ARM and worked around it by labeling "fn" as 
nothrow, then the actual function "op" passed to it in 
thread_suspendHandler as nothrow, and finally removing the 
commented out nothrow at the top of core.sys.posix.signal.  That 
finally shut it up, and the tests passed too.

So at least ldc seems to detect it as an error on certain arches! 
;)
Sep 24 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Martin Nowak <code dawg.eu> writes:
On 09/24/2014 11:35 PM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 callWithStackShell is marked nothrow, yet it's delegate parameter 'fn'
 is not nothrow!


https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/966


 Bonus points, D inline assembly in a nothrow function.


Marking asm as throwing by default doesn't make too much sense IMO,
because it's fairly difficult to throw from iasm (never seen it) and the 
main point about iasm is full control.
So why not simply trust the programmer decision here?
Sep 25 2014
parent Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On 26 September 2014 01:32, Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:

 On 09/24/2014 11:35 PM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 callWithStackShell is marked nothrow, yet it's delegate parameter 'fn'
 is not nothrow!



 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/966


 Bonus points, D inline assembly in a nothrow function.



 Marking asm as throwing by default doesn't make too much sense IMO,
 because it's fairly difficult to throw from iasm (never seen it) and the
 main point about iasm is full control.
 So why not simply trust the programmer decision here?



OK then:

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/4030
Sep 26 2014
prev sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/24/2014 2:35 PM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 delegate parameter 'fn' is not nothrow!


Not nohow? No way!
Sep 25 2014