www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - dmd 1.067 and 2.052 release

reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's brand new.)


http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip
Feb 18 2011
next sibling parent "Lars T. Kyllingstad" <public kyllingen.NOSPAMnet> writes:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 02:18:55 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:


 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)
 
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


64-bit compiler, new date/time module AND a bunch of bug fixes -- is it 
christmas already? :)

Fantastic work, guys!

-Lars
Feb 18 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent Bernard Helyer <b.helyer gmail.com> writes:
64 bit Linux support, std.date is gone, alternative linker...

...so what are you guys doing for the end of the world?
Feb 18 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Russel Winder <russel russel.org.uk> writes:
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 02:18 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's bran=


d new.)

Damn, now I have to go and fix the SCons D tool (which currently forces
32-bit on any platform) instead of just being able to grumble about lack
of 64-bit support!

Great stuff.  Thanks.


=20
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip
=20
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel russel.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
Feb 18 2011
parent reply Gour <gour atmarama.net> writes:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:25:39 +0000
Russel Winder <russel russel.org.uk> wrote:


 Damn, now I have to go and fix the SCons D tool (which currently
 forces 32-bit on any platform) instead of just being able to grumble
 about lack of 64-bit support!


What about waf/cmake? Are they ready for 64bit D?


Sincerely,
Gour

--=20
=E2=80=9CIn the material world, conceptions of good and bad are
all mental speculations=E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D (Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu)

http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: CDBF17CA
Feb 18 2011
parent reply Russel Winder <russel russel.org.uk> writes:
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 12:30 +0100, Gour wrote:

 On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:25:39 +0000
 Russel Winder <russel russel.org.uk> wrote:
=20

 Damn, now I have to go and fix the SCons D tool (which currently
 forces 32-bit on any platform) instead of just being able to grumble
 about lack of 64-bit support!


=20
 What about waf/cmake? Are they ready for 64bit D?


I have not used Waf for a D project, just for C++ and LaTeX ones, so I
am not sure the state of play there.  Someone, definitely not me (*),
will have to contact Thomas Nagy to ask who to contact to get D tool
development.

I try and avoid using CMake, so have no idea what the state of play
there is.

(*) Thomas has banned me from the Waf Google group so I am not able to
monitor or contribute to the Waf eco-system.  Which is irritating as I
really quite like Waf.

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel russel.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
Feb 18 2011
parent reply Gour <gour atmarama.net> writes:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:15:48 +0000
Russel Winder <russel russel.org.uk> wrote:


 I have not used Waf for a D project, just for C++ and LaTeX ones, so I
 am not sure the state of play there. =20


Do you use SCons for D projects?


 Someone, definitely not me (*), will have to contact Thomas Nagy to
 ask who to contact to get D tool development.


Being busy with other things I put my waf-list subscription into
web-only mode.


 I try and avoid using CMake, so have no idea what the state of play
 there is.


OK.


 (*) Thomas has banned me from the Waf Google group so I am not able to
 monitor or contribute to the Waf eco-system.  Which is irritating as I
 really quite like Waf.


Really?

What happened?

I've noticed, when suggesting some improvements to Waf , via IRC, that
he tend to be (sometimes) a little bit non-flexible, but
banning... :-(


Sincerely,
Gour

--=20
=E2=80=9CIn the material world, conceptions of good and bad are
all mental speculations=E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D (Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu)

http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: CDBF17CA
Feb 18 2011
parent Russel Winder <russel russel.org.uk> writes:
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 14:27 +0100, Gour wrote:

 On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:15:48 +0000
 Russel Winder <russel russel.org.uk> wrote:
=20

 I have not used Waf for a D project, just for C++ and LaTeX ones, so I
 am not sure the state of play there. =20


=20
 Do you use SCons for D projects?


Yes and no.  My "projects" that have D code are not a collection of
source code that gets built into artefacts and possibly installed -- the
ideal situation for Waf -- they are collections of programs each of
which is compiled and run independently -- a hard problem for Waf, but a
sweet spot for SCons.


 Someone, definitely not me (*), will have to contact Thomas Nagy to
 ask who to contact to get D tool development.


=20
 Being busy with other things I put my waf-list subscription into
 web-only mode.
=20

 I try and avoid using CMake, so have no idea what the state of play
 there is.


=20
 OK.
=20

 (*) Thomas has banned me from the Waf Google group so I am not able to
 monitor or contribute to the Waf eco-system.  Which is irritating as I
 really quite like Waf.


=20
 Really?
=20
 What happened?


I think Thomas took exception to me doing a compare and contrast of
SCons and Waf and then contributing to the SCons project as well as the
Waf project.  I surmise that he thinks I am SCons advocate trying to
destroy Waf.  However as he won't communicate with me via any channel I
have tried, I don't actually know why he has banned me.  But being
banned from a Google group completely excludes you from any access.  I
had been getting email from the group though, but when I emailed Thomas
about something, he cut that off as well.  Basically it seems he wants
to exclude me from any form of interaction in the Waf community.  I keep
thinking of "why cut off your finger to spite your nose".


 I've noticed, when suggesting some improvements to Waf , via IRC, that
 he tend to be (sometimes) a little bit non-flexible, but
 banning... :-(


I've given up worrying about it.   All the clients I have moved to using
Waf just don't bother to contribute back the things they develop for
their Waf use as a form of existential protest.

Anyway this is really rather off-topic for this list!


--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel russel.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
Feb 18 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent Bernard Helyer <b.helyer gmail.com> writes:
Had to roll back to 2.051, hit this:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2962

Bug with SDC. If you're _really_ short of test cases, you can mine 
through SDC's 12000 odd lines of code. *g*

https://github.com/bhelyer/SDC
Feb 18 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Walter:


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


2.052 32-bit version seems to work.

Online I don't see the info about the new xorshift:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/phobos/std_random.html

And I suggest to add to that std_random page a note that explains when and why
use xorshift instead of the other rnd generators.

Bye,
bearophile
Feb 18 2011
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/18/11 6:10 AM, bearophile wrote:

 Walter:


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


 2.052 32-bit version seems to work.

 Online I don't see the info about the new xorshift:
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/phobos/std_random.html

 And I suggest to add to that std_random page a note that explains when and why
use xorshift instead of the other rnd generators.

 Bye,
 bearophile


Also there are a bunch of bugs I fixed but didn't have the time to put 
in the changelog. Will "hot patch" the changelog when I get a chance.

Andrei
Feb 18 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
Documentation isn't updated to include std.datetime and core.time.

Walter Bright Wrote:


 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's brand
new.)
 
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip
Feb 18 2011
parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Friday, February 18, 2011 11:23:17 Jesse Phillips wrote:

 Documentation isn't updated to include std.datetime and core.time.


The documentation in the zip file looks updated, but what's on 
www.digitalmars.com definitely hasn't been updated.  Other modules, such as 
std.string, std.array, and std.file which have had definite API changes are the 
same as 2.051 on the website.

www.d-programming-language.org has up-to-date documentation, but it's currently 
built off of the git version, not the most recent release, so while it may be 
correct now, it's going to drift - unless Andrei changes what he's doing with
it 
and makes it the last release. But I think that he's still experimenting with 
the site, so it's still in flux and not really intended to be the place to go
to 
look up info on D yet, I believe.

- Jonathan M Davis
Feb 18 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2011-02-18 11:18, Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


It's amazing how each new release fixes more and more bugs. Keep up the 
good work.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 18 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's 
 brand new.)
 
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


Eleven man-months to implement a 64-bit backend is pretty impressive, I 
reckon. Contratulations, Walter!

BTW despite the emphasis on D2, this release has one of the highest 
number of D1 bugfixes, ever.
Feb 18 2011
parent reply dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> writes:
== Quote from Don (nospam nospam.com)'s article

 Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


 Eleven man-months to implement a 64-bit backend is pretty impressive, I
 reckon. Contratulations, Walter!
 BTW despite the emphasis on D2, this release has one of the highest
 number of D1 bugfixes, ever.


Since when was it even 11?  I thought the first 64 commits weren't until June of
last year.
Feb 18 2011
parent reply phobophile <mask crusader.com> writes:
dsimcha Wrote:


 == Quote from Don (nospam nospam.com)'s article

 Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


 Eleven man-months to implement a 64-bit backend is pretty impressive, I
 reckon. Contratulations, Walter!
 BTW despite the emphasis on D2, this release has one of the highest
 number of D1 bugfixes, ever.


 
 Since when was it even 11?  I thought the first 64 commits weren't until June
of
 last year.


The guy has been promising 64 bits since over a year ago. WTF is wrong with
you? Not that impressive anymore.
Feb 22 2011
parent Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
phobophile wrote:

 dsimcha Wrote:
 

 == Quote from Don (nospam nospam.com)'s article

 Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


 Eleven man-months to implement a 64-bit backend is pretty impressive, I
 reckon. Contratulations, Walter!
 BTW despite the emphasis on D2, this release has one of the highest
 number of D1 bugfixes, ever.


 Since when was it even 11?  I thought the first 64 commits weren't until June
of
 last year.


 
 The guy has been promising 64 bits since over a year ago. WTF is wrong with
you? Not that impressive anymore.


The first commit was on 21 June 2010. (All that first commit was, was 
defining the 64 bit register set -- it was really the very beginning of 
implementation). So it's 8 months today.
Feb 22 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Graham St Jack <Graham.StJack internode.on.net> writes:
Fantastic news! Well done once again to the whole team.

Now that the 64-bit bugbear is in the bag (along with a big pile of 
bugs), what is next? Is there a list somewhere detailing the planned 
language/toolchain changes that will make it into D2? Are we converging 
on a stable release of the language anytime soon?

In particular, are there any plans to re-examine the tail-const issue in 
light of the compiler patch proposed by Michel Fortin in his post: 
"const(Object)ref is here!" back in December?

Some other issues I assume are still in flux (and can remember) are:
* Tweaks to usability of const/immutable/shared.
* Tweaks to usability of nothrow, pure, etc.
* Rollout of const, nothrow, pure, etc thoughout phobos.
* Fate of the delete keyword.
* Fate of the scope keyword used in object declaration and function 
parameters.
* Meaning of in keyword for function parameters. Is it just const, and 
if so, why not just use const?

I don't have (much) of a personal agenda here - I just want the rough 
edges smoothed off and a stable language.


-- 

Graham St Jack
Feb 20 2011
next sibling parent Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes gmail.com> writes:
Am 21.02.2011 01:51, schrieb Graham St Jack:

 Fantastic news! Well done once again to the whole team.

 Now that the 64-bit bugbear is in the bag (along with a big pile of
 bugs), what is next? Is there a list somewhere detailing the planned
 language/toolchain changes that will make it into D2? Are we converging
 on a stable release of the language anytime soon?

 In particular, are there any plans to re-examine the tail-const issue in
 light of the compiler patch proposed by Michel Fortin in his post:
 "const(Object)ref is here!" back in December?

 Some other issues I assume are still in flux (and can remember) are:
 * Tweaks to usability of const/immutable/shared.
 * Tweaks to usability of nothrow, pure, etc.
 * Rollout of const, nothrow, pure, etc thoughout phobos.
 * Fate of the delete keyword.
 * Fate of the scope keyword used in object declaration and function
 parameters.
 * Meaning of in keyword for function parameters. Is it just const, and
 if so, why not just use const?

 I don't have (much) of a personal agenda here - I just want the rough
 edges smoothed off and a stable language.


If I recall correctly, the next thing to be implemented was support for 
shared libraries (dmd being able to create create position-independent 
code ("PIC")).

Cheers,
- Daniel
Feb 20 2011
prev sibling parent reply Michel Fortin <michel.fortin michelf.com> writes:
On 2011-02-20 20:21:20 -0500, Graham St Jack 
<Graham.StJack internode.on.net> said:


 In particular, are there any plans to re-examine the tail-const issue 
 in light of the compiler patch proposed by Michel Fortin in his post: 
 "const(Object)ref is here!" back in December?


Note that there's now a pull request for that:
<https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3>

And if someone wants to test it, just download and compile the 
const-object-ref branch of my dmd fork:
<https://github.com/michelf/dmd/tree/const-object-ref>

I'm currently waiting for feedback from Walter about this (and possibly 
others who dare to test it before it's in the mainline) before putting 
more work on it.


-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin michelf.com
http://michelf.com/
Feb 20 2011
parent Graham St Jack <Graham.StJack internode.on.net> writes:
On 21/02/11 16:14, Michel Fortin wrote:

 On 2011-02-20 20:21:20 -0500, Graham St Jack 
 <Graham.StJack internode.on.net> said:


 In particular, are there any plans to re-examine the tail-const issue 
 in light of the compiler patch proposed by Michel Fortin in his post: 
 "const(Object)ref is here!" back in December?


 Note that there's now a pull request for that:
 <https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3>

 And if someone wants to test it, just download and compile the 
 const-object-ref branch of my dmd fork:
 <https://github.com/michelf/dmd/tree/const-object-ref>

 I'm currently waiting for feedback from Walter about this (and 
 possibly others who dare to test it before it's in the mainline) 
 before putting more work on it.


Excellent - hopefully Walter will like it. I will have a go at compiling 
your branch and trying it out, but my use cases aren't all that stressful.

-- 
Graham St Jack
Feb 21 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Stephan <spam extrawurst.org> writes:
On 18.02.2011 11:18, Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


Nice release in theorie but since i did not get the time to test the 
beta it seems some regressions made it into the release that rendered my 
codebase unbuildable...

The problem is that i cannot reduce it properly. (win32, dmd 2.052)

1) Without changing anything suddenly i get linker errors. I am building 
an executable linking in a static lib that contains some methods using 
std.random.uniform. When i now try to build the executable the linker 
complains about std.random.uniform not being found. What the heck ? The 
whole rest of phobos is there and this is missing ??

2) This one is really weird. After removing all the std.random.uniform 
crap from above it compiles and links but crashes right in the beginning 
befor even entering my main method. This just happens in debug builds. 
Funny thing is that this is not due to some unittest of mine. And 
correct me if i am wrong but phobos is shipped without unittests either, 
right ?

Any help is welcome.
Stephan
Feb 21 2011
next sibling parent reply Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> writes:
On 21.02.2011 11:53, Stephan wrote:

 On 18.02.2011 11:18, Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


 Nice release in theorie but since i did not get the time to test the 
 beta it seems some regressions made it into the release that rendered 
 my codebase unbuildable...

 The problem is that i cannot reduce it properly. (win32, dmd 2.052)

 1) Without changing anything suddenly i get linker errors. I am 
 building an executable linking in a static lib that contains some 
 methods using std.random.uniform. When i now try to build the 
 executable the linker complains about std.random.uniform not being 
 found. What the heck ? The whole rest of phobos is there and this is 
 missing ??


Having hit similar things earlier, I'll tell you my recipe. I usually 
rebuild *everything* step by step  starting with and including all 3rd 
party D libraries with new dmd. And making sure nothing from old version 
sliped on the path. Yes, that's tiresome, especially when you haven't 
touch those libraries for quite a long time (assuming they are sort of 
stable).


 2) This one is really weird. After removing all the std.random.uniform 
 crap from above it compiles and links but crashes right in the 
 beginning befor even entering my main method. This just happens in 
 debug builds. Funny thing is that this is not due to some unittest of 
 mine. And correct me if i am wrong but phobos is shipped without 
 unittests either, right ?

 Any help is welcome.
 Stephan



-- 
Dmitry Olshansky
Feb 21 2011
parent Stephan <spam extrawurst.org> writes:
On 21.02.2011 12:34, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:

 On 21.02.2011 11:53, Stephan wrote:

 On 18.02.2011 11:18, Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


 Nice release in theorie but since i did not get the time to test the
 beta it seems some regressions made it into the release that rendered
 my codebase unbuildable...

 The problem is that i cannot reduce it properly. (win32, dmd 2.052)

 1) Without changing anything suddenly i get linker errors. I am
 building an executable linking in a static lib that contains some
 methods using std.random.uniform. When i now try to build the
 executable the linker complains about std.random.uniform not being
 found. What the heck ? The whole rest of phobos is there and this is
 missing ??


 Having hit similar things earlier, I'll tell you my recipe. I usually
 rebuild *everything* step by step starting with and including all 3rd
 party D libraries with new dmd. And making sure nothing from old version
 sliped on the path. Yes, that's tiresome, especially when you haven't
 touch those libraries for quite a long time (assuming they are sort of
 stable).


I doubt that. That was the first thing i tried coming from a 
professional C++ work flow ;)



 2) This one is really weird. After removing all the std.random.uniform
 crap from above it compiles and links but crashes right in the
 beginning befor even entering my main method. This just happens in
 debug builds. Funny thing is that this is not due to some unittest of
 mine. And correct me if i am wrong but phobos is shipped without
 unittests either, right ?

 Any help is welcome.
 Stephan
Feb 21 2011
prev sibling parent reply Extrawurst <spam extrawurst.org> writes:
On 21.02.2011 09:53, Stephan wrote:

 On 18.02.2011 11:18, Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


 Nice release in theorie but since i did not get the time to test the
 beta it seems some regressions made it into the release that rendered my
 codebase unbuildable...

 The problem is that i cannot reduce it properly. (win32, dmd 2.052)

 1) Without changing anything suddenly i get linker errors. I am building
 an executable linking in a static lib that contains some methods using
 std.random.uniform. When i now try to build the executable the linker
 complains about std.random.uniform not being found. What the heck ? The
 whole rest of phobos is there and this is missing ??


Turns out the root of all evil are the version (ddoc) blocks in phobos. 
what a great idea to change method SIGNATURES using them.
as soon as one uses those methods and tries to build ddocs out of the 
own code (using -D) methods get referenced that are not actually in the 
phobos lib. great idea since the signatures differ !
manifests in this bug btw:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5642

I wish i had tested the beta before release..



 2) This one is really weird. After removing all the std.random.uniform
 crap from above it compiles and links but crashes right in the beginning
 befor even entering my main method. This just happens in debug builds.
 Funny thing is that this is not due to some unittest of mine. And
 correct me if i am wrong but phobos is shipped without unittests either,
 right ?


I still have no clue what this is about.


 Any help is welcome.
 Stephan
Feb 22 2011
parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, February 22, 2011 16:17:39 Extrawurst wrote:

 On 21.02.2011 09:53, Stephan wrote:

 On 18.02.2011 11:18, Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)
 
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip


 
 Nice release in theorie but since i did not get the time to test the
 beta it seems some regressions made it into the release that rendered my
 codebase unbuildable...
 
 The problem is that i cannot reduce it properly. (win32, dmd 2.052)
 
 1) Without changing anything suddenly i get linker errors. I am building
 an executable linking in a static lib that contains some methods using
 std.random.uniform. When i now try to build the executable the linker
 complains about std.random.uniform not being found. What the heck ? The
 whole rest of phobos is there and this is missing ??


 
 Turns out the root of all evil are the version (ddoc) blocks in phobos.
 what a great idea to change method SIGNATURES using them.
 as soon as one uses those methods and tries to build ddocs out of the
 own code (using -D) methods get referenced that are not actually in the
 phobos lib. great idea since the signatures differ !
 manifests in this bug btw:
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5642
 
 I wish i had tested the beta before release..


You pretty much _have_ to do that in a number of cases. For instance, if a 
function only exists on Linux or or it only exists on Windows, you have to have 
a different version block for the documentation. There's no way around that.

Now, given that Phobos and druntime are the most likely places to have to worry 
about that and that many programs don't need to do that sort of thing, Phobos 
and druntime are going to be changed so that they use a different version 
identifier for their documentation blocks, so you'll only get the problem if
you 
yourself are forced to have separate documentation blocks. Andrei needs to 
change the makefiles before the version identifier in the code can be changed,
and 
he didn't do that before the release (we only figured out that we needed it 
shortly before dmd went into beta, and I believe that Andrei was pretty busy 
while it was in beta, so he didn't make the change).

Regardless, Phobos does it by necessity. Separate blocks for documentation are 
required in the cases where it uses them.

- Jonathan M Davis
Feb 22 2011
prev sibling parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:
On 18/02/2011 10:18, Walter Bright wrote:

 Now with 64 bit Linux support! (Though expect problems with it, it's
 brand new.)


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.067.zip

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.052.zip



Some doc typos:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/statement.html
"Error also contains a pointer to the points to the original exception"

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
Feb 21 2011