On 14 January 2014 17:01, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> GDC master will be temporarily broken as the frontend merge with 2.065
> (beta? prerelease?) is not yet sync'd up with the library merge.
>
> This will be fixed up in a couple of hours. :)
>
Currently beta-testing 2.065, already found a c
Am Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:45:02 +0100
schrieb Johannes Pfau :
> I'm now finally ready to upstream all ARM changes, but I'm not sure
> where the changes with ARM ASM code should be upstreamed to:
>
> This stuff is not compatible with LDC/DMD.
> Should I place those ASM blocks in a version(GNU) block
Am Tue, 14 Jan 2014 20:15:25 +
schrieb Iain Buclaw :
> On 14 January 2014 19:24, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> > Am Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:06:18 +
> > schrieb "Dicebot" :
> >
> >> On Tuesday, 14 January 2014 at 17:01:02 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > GDC master will be tempora
Am Tue, 14 Jan 2014 20:40:42 +
schrieb "Dicebot" :
> On Tuesday, 14 January 2014 at 20:15:39 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> > I trust that won't stay. A change in gcc-4.9 will break it. :)
>
> Any change or only more impactful ones? (I was actually more
> interested in 4.8 tag as this is gcc ver
On Tuesday, 14 January 2014 at 20:15:39 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
I trust that won't stay. A change in gcc-4.9 will break it. :)
Any change or only more impactful ones? (I was actually more
interested in 4.8 tag as this is gcc version in Arch)
And thanks btw ;)
On 14 January 2014 19:24, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> Am Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:06:18 +
> schrieb "Dicebot" :
>
>> On Tuesday, 14 January 2014 at 17:01:02 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > GDC master will be temporarily broken as the frontend merge
>> > with 2.065 (beta? prerelease?) is n
Am Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:06:18 +
schrieb "Dicebot" :
> On Tuesday, 14 January 2014 at 17:01:02 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > GDC master will be temporarily broken as the frontend merge
> > with 2.065 (beta? prerelease?) is not yet sync'd up with the
> > library merge.
> >
> > Thi
On 14 Jan 2014 17:45, "Joseph Rushton Wakeling" <
joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> wrote:
>
> On 14/01/14 16:49, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> I don't think upstream will like GDC-specific code in the
testsuite/library. ;-)
>>
>> The changes that do not include extended assembler look fine to push
upstream
On 14/01/14 16:49, Iain Buclaw wrote:
I don't think upstream will like GDC-specific code in the testsuite/library. ;-)
The changes that do not include extended assembler look fine to push upstream.
How does this fit with the goal of common frontend for all compilers? Or is
this part of what
On Tuesday, 14 January 2014 at 17:01:02 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Hi all,
GDC master will be temporarily broken as the frontend merge
with 2.065 (beta? prerelease?) is not yet sync'd up with the
library merge.
This will be fixed up in a couple of hours. :)
Regards
Iain.
Can you create tags
Hi all,
GDC master will be temporarily broken as the frontend merge with
2.065 (beta? prerelease?) is not yet sync'd up with the library
merge.
This will be fixed up in a couple of hours. :)
Regards
Iain.
On 14 January 2014 14:45, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> I'm now finally ready to upstream all ARM changes, but I'm not sure
> where the changes with ARM ASM code should be upstreamed to:
>
> This stuff is not compatible with LDC/DMD.
> Should I place those ASM blocks in a version(GNU) block and push thos
I'm now finally ready to upstream all ARM changes, but I'm not sure
where the changes with ARM ASM code should be upstreamed to:
This stuff is not compatible with LDC/DMD.
Should I place those ASM blocks in a version(GNU) block and push those
changes to upstream druntime/test suite upstream?
https
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1029
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
15 matches
Mail list logo
