On 4/3/2016 5:48 AM, Sebastien Alaiwan via D.gnu wrote:
On Sunday, 3 April 2016 at 12:08:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
there is also generated from Brain Schott aka. Hackerpilot.
It may be useful to take a peek there.
Thanks, this definitely is going to be a source of inspiration!
(I'm also looki
On 3/31/14, 10:06 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 24 March 2014 07:34, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 23 March 2014 19:28, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 23 March 2014 09:31, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sat, 22 Mar 2014 14:50:22 -0700
schrieb Brad Roberts :
On 3/22/14, 12:02 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 22 March 2014
On 3/23/14, 3:44 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 23 March 2014 21:58, Brad Roberts wrote:
I'm not at all concerned about space, and not sure why most developers would
be. Assuming that the GDC changes were done on a non-master branch, and
that master reflects the GCC master, then seeing wha
right now. It takes less than 5 minutes to do for new
DMD branches.
On 3/23/14, 2:31 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sat, 22 Mar 2014 14:50:22 -0700
schrieb Brad Roberts :
On 3/22/14, 12:02 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 22 March 2014 18:20, Johannes Pfau wrote:
See
https://d.puremagic.com/test-res
On 3/22/14, 12:02 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 22 March 2014 18:20, Johannes Pfau wrote:
See
https://d.puremagic.com/test-results/test_data.ghtml?projectid=2&runid=62582&logid=13
(Didn't see this in my local tests, it probably needs a complete gdc
rebuild to happen)
Hmm, didn't see that either.
On 11/25/13 3:00 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 25 November 2013 20:34, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 25 November 2013 19:35, Brad Roberts wrote:
On 11/25/13 2:35 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 25 November 2013 10:32, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Yep, there's been some middle-end changes. Sorry, next time
On 11/25/13 2:35 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 25 November 2013 10:32, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Yep, there's been some middle-end changes. Sorry, next time I'll give
you heads up.
...Which, incidentally, might come very soon, as there are some other
front-end breaking changes in the pipeline with a ne
I noticed that the GDC auto-tester failed the most recent build cycle. I assumed it was due to
having an old snapshot. After updating it, the build failed in the same way.
The 'old' snapshot: GCC_VER=4.9-20130929
The one it's running now: GCC_VER=4.9-20131117
The errors:
In file included f
On 10/1/13 9:43 AM, Brad Roberts wrote:
On 10/1/13 3:00 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
All that I can think of is that flex isn't installed on the autotester box?
Regards
--
Iain Buclaw
*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Indeed it wasn't. However, shouldn't:
On 10/1/13 3:00 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
All that I can think of is that flex isn't installed on the autotester box?
Regards
--
Iain Buclaw
*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Indeed it wasn't. However, shouldn't:
a) the 4.8.1 build have failed for the same reason?
b) a configure check ha
On 9/30/13 8:59 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 1 October 2013 04:54, Brad Roberts wrote:
On 9/17/13 12:41 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 17 September 2013 01:33, Brad Roberts wrote:
It looks like the auto-tester for gdc has been failing for quite a while
in
the phobos math.d tests. Anyone looking
On 9/17/13 12:41 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 17 September 2013 01:33, Brad Roberts wrote:
It looks like the auto-tester for gdc has been failing for quite a while in
the phobos math.d tests. Anyone looking at those results?
http;//d.puremagic.com/test-results/?projectid=2
http
It looks like the auto-tester for gdc has been failing for quite a while in the phobos math.d tests.
Anyone looking at those results?
http;//d.puremagic.com/test-results/?projectid=2
http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/platform-history.ghtml?projectid=2&os=Linux_32
The history report is trunca
On 7/26/13 4:40 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:59:36 -0700
schrieb Brad Roberts :
Congrats! This is the first build that's actually passed the
auto-testers. :)
http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/?projectid=2
BTW: Thanks for integrating gdc into the auto tester,
On 7/24/13 9:04 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Thu, 18 Jul 2013 19:28:53 +0200
schrieb Johannes Pfau :
Maybe I can track down that std.parallelism issue in the meantime...
It was a memory corruption caused by core/thread.di and core/thread.d
being out of sync.
Fixed in
https://github.com/D-Prog
Updated to:
See http://dlang.org/ for more information about the D Language. See http://gdcproject.org/ for
more information on the gdc, the D Language front end to gcc.
On 5/31/13 9:58 AM, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
When trying to sign-up to this list at:
http://lists.puremagic.com/cgi-bin/ma
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Around April, I got myself a new server that I planned to be dedicated to all
> things gdc. Initially it provided a default web page - which will soon have
> useful links to development, bugs, build releases for various architectures /
> platforms, etc.
>
On 5/26/2012 5:06 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 26-05-2012 14:03, Trass3r wrote:
>>> The compiler is able to cope. Have made some updates to the D runtime
>>> and Phobos library to weed out any issues relating to such platforms
>>> (NaCL is another system which uses 32bit pointers on x86_64 a
On 4/26/2011 7:47 PM, Daniel Green wrote:
> MinGW-w64 D1 with phobos has been successfully compiled. Phobos contained 3
> errors. Two were Windows function calls.
> Phobos uses size_t but Win64 uses uint. The other was with the GC relating
> to Windows stack information. Several
> functions
On 2/6/2011 2:58 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> == Quote from Brad Roberts (bra...@puremagic.com)'s article
>> I'd be happy to have gcc finding vectorization opportunities, but there's no
> need to add this sort of thing to the
>> language. This already has a hook to ca
On 2/6/2011 4:15 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> == Quote from Mike Farnsworth (mike.farnswo...@gmail.com)'s article
>> On 02/01/2011 10:38 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>> I haven't given it much thought on how internal representation could be,
>>> but I'd
>>> lean on using unions in D code for usage in the l
On 11/4/2010 3:50 AM, Paulo wrote:
> Cool,
>
> I am adding D support to GDB for the PSP too, for a next build :)
What are you adding beyond what's already been done for gdb 7.2?
On 8/16/2010 9:33 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> What are the current blockers to merging non-ancient versions of D2 into GDC?
> I've been quietly following the project and noticed that:
>
> 1. It's actively being worked on.
>
> 2. D1 is up to date.
>
> 3. There were a bunch of issues w.r.t. druntime,
On 1/18/2010 11:59 PM, Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Steve Teale wrote:
>> The following produces a segfault with GDC - works OK with DMD on same
>> machine. Where do I report it?
>
> The official D Bugzilla does not accept GDC bugs any more: "Sorry,
> entering an issue into the product DGCC aka GDC
24 matches
Mail list logo
