On Feb 13, 2013 6:55 PM, "Johannes Pfau" wrote:
>
> Am Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:17:06 +
> schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>
> > On 13 February 2013 15:20, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> >
> > >>
> > >> Complete test case:
> > >> https://gist.github.com/jpf91/4944999
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >>
> > >>
../../objdir-4.7/
On Feb 13, 2013 6:55 PM, "Johannes Pfau" wrote:
>
> Am Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:17:06 +
> schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>
> > On 13 February 2013 15:20, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> >
> > >>
> > >> Complete test case:
> > >> https://gist.github.com/jpf91/4944999
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >>
> > >>
../../objdir-4.7/
Am Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:17:06 +
schrieb Iain Buclaw :
> On 13 February 2013 15:20, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Complete test case:
> >> https://gist.github.com/jpf91/4944999
> >>
> >> -
> >>
> >> ../../objdir-4.7/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libphobos/dm-test.reduced/datetime2.d:22:
> >> i
On 13 February 2013 15:20, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 13 February 2013 14:35, Johannes Pfau wrote:
>
>> Am Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:10:26 +
>> schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>>
>> > On 13 February 2013 13:26, Johannes Pfau wrote:
>> >
>> > > Am Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:16:31 +
>> > > schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>>
On 13 February 2013 14:35, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> Am Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:10:26 +
> schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>
> > On 13 February 2013 13:26, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> >
> > > Am Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:16:31 +
> > > schrieb Iain Buclaw :
> > >
> > > > TREE_ADDRESSABLE should be sufficient. I can'
Am Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:14:36 +0100
schrieb "David Nadlinger" :
> On Tuesday, 12 February 2013 at 17:45:11 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> > OT: I think a simple constructor shouldn't prevent a type from
> > being a
> > POD, but that should be defined by dmd /frontend.
>
> I wouldn't spend too much t
Am Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:10:26 +
schrieb Iain Buclaw :
> On 13 February 2013 13:26, Johannes Pfau wrote:
>
> > Am Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:16:31 +
> > schrieb Iain Buclaw :
> >
> > > TREE_ADDRESSABLE should be sufficient. I can't think any reason
> > > off the top of my head why not.
> > >
> >
On 13 February 2013 14:10, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 13 February 2013 13:26, Johannes Pfau wrote:
>
>> Am Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:16:31 +
>> schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>>
>> > TREE_ADDRESSABLE should be sufficient. I can't think any reason off
>> > the top of my head why not.
>> >
>>
>> maybe TREE_ADD
On 13 February 2013 13:26, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> Am Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:16:31 +
> schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>
> > TREE_ADDRESSABLE should be sufficient. I can't think any reason off
> > the top of my head why not.
> >
>
> maybe TREE_ADDRESSABLE is too strong: It generates errors in the
> backen
On Tuesday, 12 February 2013 at 17:45:11 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
OT: I think a simple constructor shouldn't prevent a type from
being a
POD, but that should be defined by dmd /frontend.
I wouldn't spend too much time on implementing the old behavior -
I think I managed to convince Walter th
Am Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:16:31 +
schrieb Iain Buclaw :
> TREE_ADDRESSABLE should be sufficient. I can't think any reason off
> the top of my head why not.
>
maybe TREE_ADDRESSABLE is too strong: It generates errors in the
backend if the frontend produces non-lvalues:
---
auto b = Date();
On 12 February 2013 17:45, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> I've started debugging the unit test failures in std.datetime:
>
> We have this Date struct:
> -
> struct Date
> {
> this(int a){}
> short _year = 2;
> ubyte _month = 1;
> ubyte _day = 1;
> }
> -
>
> It's passed to D run
I've started debugging the unit test failures in std.datetime:
We have this Date struct:
-
struct Date
{
this(int a){}
short _year = 2;
ubyte _month = 1;
ubyte _day = 1;
}
-
It's passed to D runtime variadic functions. It's 4 bytes in total so
GCC passes this struct in
13 matches
Mail list logo
