www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - DMD source violates c++11 standards.

reply "Hans W. Uhlig" <huhlig gmail.com> writes:
This also makes compiling LDC with clang rather difficult

[  1%] Building CXX object CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/dmd2/func.c.o
/root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:540:18: error: case value 
evaluates to -2, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' (aka 
'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
             case -2:    // can't determine because of fwd refs
                  ^
/root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:503:18: error: case value 
evaluates to -1, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' (aka 
'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
             case -1:
                  ^
/root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:632:22: error: case value 
evaluates to -2, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' (aka 
'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
                 case -2:
                      ^
/root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:629:22: error: case value 
evaluates to -1, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' (aka 
'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
                 case -1:
May 27 2013
next sibling parent reply "Daniel Murphy" <yebblies nospamgmail.com> writes:
"Hans W. Uhlig" <huhlig gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:idtvbddofuxwpsbtowsj forum.dlang.org...

 This also makes compiling LDC with clang rather difficult


DMD is not written in C++11.  Turning of the C++11 warnings in clang will 
fix this problem.
May 27 2013
next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 5/27/2013 4:47 PM, Daniel Murphy wrote:

 "Hans W. Uhlig" <huhlig gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:idtvbddofuxwpsbtowsj forum.dlang.org...

 This also makes compiling LDC with clang rather difficult


 DMD is not written in C++11.  Turning of the C++11 warnings in clang will
 fix this problem.


Also, you can submit a bugzilla entry for it, or even a pull request. There's
no 
reason for such code in DMD to remain.
May 27 2013
parent reply "Borden" <2013 bordenrhodes.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 28 May 2013 at 00:12:57 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 5/27/2013 4:47 PM, Daniel Murphy wrote:

 "Hans W. Uhlig" <huhlig gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:idtvbddofuxwpsbtowsj forum.dlang.org...

 This also makes compiling LDC with clang rather difficult


 DMD is not written in C++11.  Turning of the C++11 warnings in 
 clang will
 fix this problem.


 Also, you can submit a bugzilla entry for it, or even a pull 
 request. There's no reason for such code in DMD to remain.


I was thinking about that: surely D's mature enough that dmd can 
be written in D?
May 27 2013
parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 02:15:39 Borden wrote:

 I was thinking about that: surely D's mature enough that dmd can
 be written in D?


Work is being done to convert it to D, but there's a fair bit of work to do 
for it to happen (like improving what extern(C++) can do so that it can better 
integrate with the various backends).

- Jonathan M Davis
May 27 2013
prev sibling parent Ziad Hatahet <hatahet gmail.com> writes:
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Daniel Murphy <yebblies nospamgmail.com>wrote:


 DMD is not written in C++11.  Turning of the C++11 warnings in clang will
 fix this problem



True, but could it not be the case that, since there might be stricter type
checking included, certain errors might show up? Like the example above,
where a switch is being done on an unsigned type, and negative cases are
being handled.

--
Ziad
May 27 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Hans W. Uhlig" <huhlig gmail.com> writes:
Prepping a patch for dmd to correct some of the C++11 Correctness 
issues.

I came across this set and am a bit hesitant to change it without 
knowing side effects.

/home/huhlig/Temp/d/ldc/dmd2/struct.c:239:14: error: case value 
evaluates to -1, which cannot be narrowed to type 'structalign_t' 
(aka 'unsigned int')
       [-Wc++11-narrowing]
         case STRUCTALIGN_DEFAULT:
              ^
/home/huhlig/Temp/d/ldc/dmd2/mars.h:308:29: note: expanded from 
macro 'STRUCTALIGN_DEFAULT'
#define STRUCTALIGN_DEFAULT ~0  // magic value means "match 
whatever the underlying C compiler does"

void AggregateDeclaration::alignmember(
         structalign_t alignment,   // struct alignment that is in 
effect
         unsigned size,             // alignment requirement of 
field
         unsigned *poffset)
{
     //printf("alignment = %d, size = %d, offset = 
%d\n",alignment,size,offset);
     switch (alignment)
     {
         case 1:
             // No alignment
             break;

         case STRUCTALIGN_DEFAULT:
         {   /* Must match what the corresponding C compiler's 
default
              * alignment behavior is.
              */
             assert(size != 3);
             unsigned sa = (size == 0 || 8 < size) ? 8 : size;
             *poffset = (*poffset + sa - 1) & ~(sa - 1);
             break;
         }

         default:
             // Align on alignment boundary, which must be a 
positive power of 2
             assert(alignment > 0 && !(alignment & (alignment - 
1)));
             *poffset = (*poffset + alignment - 1) & ~(alignment - 
1);
             break;
     }
}
May 28 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Maxim Fomin" <maxim maxim-fomin.ru> writes:
On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 23:25:37 UTC, Hans W. Uhlig wrote:

 This also makes compiling LDC with clang rather difficult

 [  1%] Building CXX object 
 CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/dmd2/func.c.o
 /root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:540:18: error: case value 
 evaluates to -2, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' (aka 
 'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
             case -2:    // can't determine because of fwd refs
                  ^
 /root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:503:18: error: case value 
 evaluates to -1, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' (aka 
 'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
             case -1:
                  ^
 /root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:632:22: error: case value 
 evaluates to -2, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' (aka 
 'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
                 case -2:
                      ^
 /root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:629:22: error: case value 
 evaluates to -1, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' (aka 
 'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
                 case -1:


There were discussions raised in the past about dmd source 
compile warnings which are generated by enabling some warning 
options. Depending on which switches are turned on, compiler can 
produce from 100 up to 10_000 warnings. Most of them are useless 
since they do not perform flow analysis (for example, those 
complains about variables may being not initialized which ignore 
assertions) or are issued in dirty backend code. It is extremly 
unlikely to extract something worth fixing from such large amount 
of messages. Dmd sources are at everyday look of dozen 
developers, so there is low probability to get from warnings 
something useful which solves potential problem.

I use conservative number of warning switches which produces two 
warnings in current dmd git sources - one about obsolete cast 
from string type to char*, and the second about ignoring __cdecl 
attribute. I don't bother to fix them.
May 28 2013
parent reply "Hans W. Uhlig" <huhlig gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 28 May 2013 at 19:33:08 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:

 On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 23:25:37 UTC, Hans W. Uhlig wrote:

 This also makes compiling LDC with clang rather difficult

 [  1%] Building CXX object 
 CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/dmd2/func.c.o
 /root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:540:18: error: case value 
 evaluates to -2, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' 
 (aka 'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
            case -2:    // can't determine because of fwd refs
                 ^
 /root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:503:18: error: case value 
 evaluates to -1, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' 
 (aka 'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
            case -1:
                 ^
 /root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:632:22: error: case value 
 evaluates to -2, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' 
 (aka 'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
                case -2:
                     ^
 /root/llvm/src/ldc/dmd2/func.c:629:22: error: case value 
 evaluates to -1, which cannot be narrowed to type 'size_t' 
 (aka 'unsigned long') [-Wc++11-narrowing]
                case -1:


 There were discussions raised in the past about dmd source 
 compile warnings which are generated by enabling some warning 
 options. Depending on which switches are turned on, compiler 
 can produce from 100 up to 10_000 warnings. Most of them are 
 useless since they do not perform flow analysis (for example, 
 those complains about variables may being not initialized which 
 ignore assertions) or are issued in dirty backend code. It is 
 extremly unlikely to extract something worth fixing from such 
 large amount of messages. Dmd sources are at everyday look of 
 dozen developers, so there is low probability to get from 
 warnings something useful which solves potential problem.

 I use conservative number of warning switches which produces 
 two warnings in current dmd git sources - one about obsolete 
 cast from string type to char*, and the second about ignoring 
 __cdecl attribute. I don't bother to fix them.


These are just from the standard set of clang switched while 
trying to compile LDC.
May 28 2013
parent reply "David Nadlinger" <see klickverbot.at> writes:
On Tuesday, 28 May 2013 at 19:56:40 UTC, Hans W. Uhlig wrote:

 These are just from the standard set of clang switched while 
 trying to compile LDC.


More precisely, they are pulled in from the LLVM compiler flags
(llvm-config --cxxflags) if LLVM was compiled with --enable-cxx11.

David
May 28 2013
parent reply "David Nadlinger" <see klickverbot.at> writes:
On Tuesday, 28 May 2013 at 21:16:44 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:

 More precisely, they are pulled in from the LLVM compiler flags
 (llvm-config --cxxflags) if LLVM was compiled with 
 --enable-cxx11.


(i.e. the C++11 mode switch)

I'd much prefer for this one to be resolved in the DMD source 
instead of as a hack on the LDC side, as there really isn't much 
reason not to.

David
May 28 2013
parent "Hans W. Uhlig" <huhlig gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 28 May 2013 at 21:21:57 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:

 On Tuesday, 28 May 2013 at 21:16:44 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:

 More precisely, they are pulled in from the LLVM compiler flags
 (llvm-config --cxxflags) if LLVM was compiled with 
 --enable-cxx11.


 (i.e. the C++11 mode switch)

 I'd much prefer for this one to be resolved in the DMD source 
 instead of as a hack on the LDC side, as there really isn't 
 much reason not to.

 David


There is one Error on the LDC Side.

dmd2/mars.c:106:
--- llvm_version = "LLVM "LDC_LLVM_VERSION_STRING;
+++ llvm_version = "LLVM " LDC_LLVM_VERSION_STRING;
May 28 2013