www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - Beta 2.078.2

reply Martin Nowak <code+news.digitalmars dawg.eu> writes:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=VfAz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Feb 01 2018
parent reply Andrew Benton <Andrew.Benton675 gmail.com> writes:
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
Feb 01 2018
parent reply Seb <seb wilzba.ch> writes:
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.
Feb 01 2018
parent reply Antonio Corbi <antonio ggmail.com> writes:
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
Feb 02 2018
parent reply Seb <seb wilzba.ch> writes:
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).
Feb 02 2018
next sibling parent Antonio Corbi <antonio ggmail.com> writes:
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
Feb 02 2018
prev sibling parent reply Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
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
Feb 02 2018
next sibling parent Timothee Cour <thelastmammoth gmail.com> writes:
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
Feb 04 2018
prev sibling parent Timothee Cour <thelastmammoth gmail.com> writes:
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
Feb 04 2018