On 08/17/14 16:16, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu wrote:
> Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 15:15:12 +0200
> schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
>
>> Do you see any problems with it? (Other than gcc not removing
>> that dead constant load)
>
> It's perfect for structs, but when simply declaring a Volatile!uint the
>
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 14:47:57 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 14:36:53 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 13:59:03 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
> On 08/17/14 15:44, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu wrote:
>
>> I am compiling for arm and I am sorry
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 16:45:15 +0200
schrieb Johannes Pfau :
> the callee can't rely on its
caller of course ;-)
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 14:36:53 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
> On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 13:59:03 UTC, Artur Skawina via
> D.gnu wrote:
> > On 08/17/14 15:44, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu wrote:
> >
> >> I am compiling for arm and I am sorry I misinterpreted the
> >> optimized code. Actually the c
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 13:59:03 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
On 08/17/14 15:44, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu wrote:
I am compiling for arm and I am sorry I misinterpreted the
optimized code. Actually the code is correct but it still does
not work.
The problem is that the call to get th
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 15:15:12 +0200
schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
> Do you see any problems with it? (Other than gcc not removing
> that dead constant load)
It's perfect for structs, but when simply declaring a Volatile!uint the
pointer dereference must be done manually, right?
enum Ti
On 08/17/14 15:44, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu wrote:
> I am compiling for arm and I am sorry I misinterpreted the optimized code.
> Actually the code is correct but it still does not work.
> The problem is that the call to get the tls pointer for volatile_dummy seems
> to corrupt the register (r3)
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 11:35:33 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
It works for me:
import volat; // module w/ the last Volatile(T)
implementation.
struct uartreg {
Volatile!int sr;
Volatile!int dr;
Volatile!int brr;
Volatile!int cr1;
Volatile
On 08/17/14 10:49, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu wrote:
> That's a good start. Can you also get unary operators working?
> e.g
> TimerB++;
Unary ops are easy. If you mean post-inc and post-dec -- that's a
language problem. At least for volatile, they will cause a compile
error; for atomic ops the naiv
On 08/17/14 13:57, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu wrote:
> Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 13:38:36 +0200
> schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
>
>> On 08/17/14 10:31, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu wrote:
>>> Am Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:15:57 +0200
>>> schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
>>>
It already does. Apparently th
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 13:38:36 +0200
schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
> On 08/17/14 10:31, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu wrote:
> > Am Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:15:57 +0200
> > schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
> >
> >> It already does. Apparently there are some kind of problems with
> >> certain setups,
On 08/17/14 09:57, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu wrote:
> What is the purpose of volatile_dummy? Even if it is not used,
Ensuring ordering, w/o it the compiler could reorder operations
on different volatile objects. (Which isn't necessarily a bad thing,
but people expect certain semantics of 'volatile'
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 10:44:34 +
schrieb "Mike" :
> On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 08:26:40 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> >
> > Great! But I think this pull request addresses a different
> > monitor
> > problem: There's an implicit __monitor field in every class
> > right now,
> > which makes ever
On 08/17/14 10:31, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu wrote:
> Am Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:15:57 +0200
> schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
>
>> It already does. Apparently there are some kind of problems with
>> certain setups, but, instead of addressing those problems, more and
>> more /language/ hacks are pro
On 08/17/14 11:24, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu wrote:
> On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 07:57:15 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
>>
>>
>> This seems to work.
>>
>
> This does not work with member functions
>
> struct uartreg {
> Volatile!int sr;
> Volatile!int dr;
> Volatile!int brr;
> Volatil
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 08:26:40 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Great! But I think this pull request addresses a different
monitor
problem: There's an implicit __monitor field in every class
right now,
which makes every class _instance_ bigger.
But the monitor in TypeInfo/ClassInfo is differ
On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 11:16:09 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
A `@nocode` attribute would be a good idea, yes, but there's no
need
to make it implicit for `@inline`.
But this situation demonstrates why having an intelligent
linker is a better solution than decorating with attrib
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 07:57:15 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
This seems to work.
This does not work with member functions
struct uartreg {
Volatile!int sr;
Volatile!int dr;
Volatile!int brr;
Volatile!int cr1;
Volatile!int cr2;
Volatile!int cr3;
Volatile!int gt
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 07:57:15 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
> On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 20:01:06 UTC, Artur Skawina via
> D.gnu wrote:
> > On 08/16/14 20:40, Artur Skawina wrote:
> >>> How can I use this with struct members ?
> >>
> >> One possibility would be to declare all members as
> >
Am Sat, 16 Aug 2014 11:58:49 +0200
schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
> On 08/16/14 09:33, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu wrote:
> > https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/pull/82
>
> [Only noticed this accidentally; using a mailing list
> instead of some web forum would increase visibility...]
>
>
Am Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:15:57 +0200
schrieb "Artur Skawina via D.gnu" :
> On 08/16/14 12:41, Mike via D.gnu wrote:
> > On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 09:59:03 UTC, Artur Skawina via
> > D.gnu wrote:
> >>
> >> Taking the address of an always_inline function is allowed.
> >>
> >
> > It may be allowe
Am Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:36:19 +
schrieb "Mike" :
> On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 09:29:14 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
>
> > I just had a look at this and ClassInfo has a mutable 'monitor'
> > field,
> > so it can't be placed into read-only data.
>
> This was discussed at DConf 2014.
> https
On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 20:01:06 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
On 08/16/14 20:40, Artur Skawina wrote:
How can I use this with struct members ?
One possibility would be to declare all members as
`Volatile!...`, or
I did not like that required dereference in the previous
versio
http://bugzilla.gdcproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=152
Ketmar Dark changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ket...@ketmar.no-ip.org
--- Comment #1 fro
http://bugzilla.gdcproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=152
Bug ID: 152
Summary: ICE, CtorDeclaration::semantic(Scope*): Assertion `tf
&& tf->ty == Tfunction' failed
Product: GDC
Version: 4.9.x
Hardware: All
OS: All
25 matches
Mail list logo
