www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Bug fix week

reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and 
lately work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new 
features and bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!

At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out on 
trucks to bookstores.

Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and 
issue a release on Monday. We're going public!


Andrei
May 23 2010
next sibling parent reply Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and 
 lately work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new 
 features and bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!
 
 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out on 
 trucks to bookstores.
 
 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and 
 issue a release on Monday. We're going public!
 
 
 Andrei

IMHO, one of the most important bugs to fix is actually a spec bug: 4056 Template instantiation with bare parameter not documented The foo!int syntax as a shortcut for foo!(int) isn't documented anywhere in the spec!! This is an embarrassing omission and should be fixed ASAP. Anyone could submit a patch with suggested wording for this one.
May 24 2010
next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 05/24/2010 09:08 AM, Don wrote:
 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and
 lately work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new
 features and bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!

 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out
 on trucks to bookstores.

 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and
 issue a release on Monday. We're going public!


 Andrei

IMHO, one of the most important bugs to fix is actually a spec bug: 4056 Template instantiation with bare parameter not documented The foo!int syntax as a shortcut for foo!(int) isn't documented anywhere in the spec!! This is an embarrassing omission and should be fixed ASAP. Anyone could submit a patch with suggested wording for this one.

I agree that's bad, but somewhat ironically it's not as bad for TDPL's timeline. The syntax _is_ documented in TDPL. Andrei
May 24 2010
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2010-05-24 16.17, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 On 05/24/2010 09:08 AM, Don wrote:
 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and
 lately work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new
 features and bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!

 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out
 on trucks to bookstores.

 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and
 issue a release on Monday. We're going public!


 Andrei

IMHO, one of the most important bugs to fix is actually a spec bug: 4056 Template instantiation with bare parameter not documented The foo!int syntax as a shortcut for foo!(int) isn't documented anywhere in the spec!! This is an embarrassing omission and should be fixed ASAP. Anyone could submit a patch with suggested wording for this one.

I agree that's bad, but somewhat ironically it's not as bad for TDPL's timeline. The syntax _is_ documented in TDPL. Andrei

I would say that's even worse, let me explain. In D if you run into a problem/bug with the compiler you never now where the problem is. * Is it the spec that is correct and the compiler doesn't follow the spec? * Is it the spec that is incorrect and the compiler behaves correctly? * Perhaps the spec is correct and the compiler follows the spec but a feature is not implemented correctly? * Perhaps the spec is correct but the compiler doesn't implement the feature yet. Now when TDPL comes into the picture there is yet another layer to all this. Now you can have the behavior when TDPL is correct but the compiler and the spec is incorrect or any other combination of the now three parties. -- /Jacob Carlborg
May 25 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent reply dennis luehring <dl.soluz gmx.net> writes:
Am 24.05.2010 16:08, schrieb Don:
 4056 Template instantiation with bare parameter not documented

why don't remove this feature? it isn't syntactic sugar just an "alternative" syntax (how many other alternative syntaxes needed?)
May 24 2010
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 05/24/2010 11:53 AM, dennis luehring wrote:
 Am 24.05.2010 16:08, schrieb Don:
  > 4056 Template instantiation with bare parameter not documented

 why don't remove this feature? it isn't syntactic sugar just an
 "alternative" syntax (how many other alternative syntaxes needed?)

FWIW I swear by it. Andrei
May 24 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Don wrote:
<snip>
 IMHO, one of the most important bugs to fix is actually a spec bug:
 
 4056 Template instantiation with bare parameter not documented

Why single out that one? This is the one that needs fixing most of all: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=677 Stewart.
May 27 2010
next sibling parent reply bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Stewart Gordon:
 This is the one that needs fixing most of all:
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=677

I don't think Walter will fix that bug. If you think that bug is important for you, then I suggest you to find other people that agree with you, and write down the specs yourself (and then maybe Walter will read your document to tell you how to fix its errors). This is the most voted bug, one of those votes is mine, but now I am not so sure Walter takes a look at the vote counts when he fixes bugs: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=314 Bye, bearophile
May 27 2010
parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
bearophile wrote:
 Stewart Gordon:
 This is the one that needs fixing most of all:
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=677

I don't think Walter will fix that bug.

So you suspect that he's going to leave D until the end of time as a language that cannot be implemented by third parties because the spec is incomplete?
 If you think that bug is important for you,

And if I don't _think_ that it's important for _me_, but _know_ that it's important to _the community_, then what?
 then I suggest you to find other people that agree with you, and 
 write down the specs yourself (and then maybe Walter will read your 
 document to tell you how to fix its errors).

By "errors", do you mean: * obvious typos? * bits that don't coincide with how DMD does things? * bits that don't coincide with how Walter intended it? * bits that don't coincide with Walter's current opinion? * something else?
 This is the most voted bug, one of those votes is mine, but now I am 
 not so sure Walter takes a look at the vote counts when he fixes 
 bugs:

So I'd suspected. But then, what _does_ Walter use the votes for? After all, he advertised the feature http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/announce/Vote_for_your_least_favorite_bug_s_14136.html Stewart.
May 27 2010
parent reply Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Stewart Gordon wrote:
 bearophile wrote:
 Stewart Gordon:
 This is the one that needs fixing most of all:
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=677

I don't think Walter will fix that bug.

So you suspect that he's going to leave D until the end of time as a language that cannot be implemented by third parties because the spec is incomplete?

Bearophile seems to always be very pessimistic, for some reason.
 This is the most voted bug, one of those votes is mine, but now I am 
 not so sure Walter takes a look at the vote counts when he fixes bugs:

So I'd suspected. But then, what _does_ Walter use the votes for? After all, he advertised the feature http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/announce/Vote_for_your_least_favor te_bug_s_14136.html

The situation is a little more complex than bearophile thinks. For the last six months or so, Walter has concentrated on making sure that all of the examples in TDPL will work correctly. This has involved implementing all of the new features. Most of the bugs which were fixed were submitted patches (though often Walter had to modify the patches). Votes however are definitely not ignored. If you search bugzilla, you'll find that there are 86 closed bugs which still have votes for them! Compared with 228 open bugs. So the votes themeselves are far from up-to-date.
May 27 2010
next sibling parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Don wrote:
<snip>
 The situation is a little more complex than bearophile thinks.
 For the last six months or so, Walter has concentrated on making sure 
 that all of the examples in TDPL will work correctly. This has involved 
 implementing all of the new features. Most of the bugs which were fixed 
 were submitted patches (though often Walter had to modify the patches).
 
 Votes however are definitely not ignored.
 If you search bugzilla, you'll find that there are 86 closed bugs which 
 still have votes for them! Compared with 228 open bugs.
 So the votes themeselves are far from up-to-date.

What search, exactly, did you do to come up with those figures? I get: Status: UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, REOPENED Votes: 1 gives 257 Status: UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, REOPENED Votes: 2 gives 83 Status: RESOLVED, VERIFIED, CLOSED Votes: 1 gives 64 Status: RESOLVED, VERIFIED, CLOSED Votes: 2 gives 21 I'd be amazed if there's been that much change in the last hour. Peculiarly, nothing with a WONTFIX resolution has any votes. Stewart.
May 27 2010
parent reply Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Stewart Gordon wrote:
 Don wrote:
 <snip>
 The situation is a little more complex than bearophile thinks.
 For the last six months or so, Walter has concentrated on making sure 
 that all of the examples in TDPL will work correctly. This has 
 involved implementing all of the new features. Most of the bugs which 
 were fixed were submitted patches (though often Walter had to modify 
 the patches).

 Votes however are definitely not ignored.
 If you search bugzilla, you'll find that there are 86 closed bugs 
 which still have votes for them! Compared with 228 open bugs.
 So the votes themeselves are far from up-to-date.

What search, exactly, did you do to come up with those figures? I get: Status: UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, REOPENED Votes: 1 gives 257

 I'd be amazed if there's been that much change in the last hour.

Figured it out -- I did my search using Deskzilla. Although it updates its local database very frequently, it turns out that it doesn't update the votes very often at all. So I was using stale vote figures.
 Peculiarly, nothing with a WONTFIX resolution has any votes.

I think hardly anything has ever been closed with WONTFIX.
May 27 2010
parent Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Don wrote:
 Stewart Gordon wrote:

 Peculiarly, nothing with a WONTFIX resolution has any votes.

I think hardly anything has ever been closed with WONTFIX.

I get 61 as I look. At the moment, about 7.5% of bugs filed here have any votes, so I'm not sure that 61 counts as hardly anything. Stewart.
May 27 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
<snip>
 Indeed, it would be nice if bugzilla reminded you that you have votes 
 for closed bugs.  Every time I go to vote for a bug, I remove my votes 
 from any closed bugs (which are obvious with the strikethrough text).  
 But I don't notice that until I go to vote for one.  If it reminded me 
 every time I logged in that I have votes for closed bugs, then I might 
 pay better attention.

Why do you feel the need to remove your votes from closed bugs when you're not about to place one on another bug? This has been discussed extensively on Mozilla's own bugzilla: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27553 Stewart.
May 27 2010
parent Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
<snip>
 I don't feel like pouring through a bugzilla discussion, but the reason 
 is because I may have gone to vote for an issue, but found I was out of 
 votes, and I want to keep my existing ones (or I had to cancel another 
 bug vote in order to vote for the new one).  At a later time when one of 
 my voted-for bugs gets resolved, then I can vote for the issue I 
 couldn't vote on, or removed my vote from.

The best way to deal with that, IMO, would be for the bugmail to include a note like "You have voted for this bug" when the bug is resolved. If it were done by an alert when you log in, either it would lose its effect or you would have to waste time checking the list to see whether it's just the same bug(s) that you've deliberately left your vote on as before. Stewart.
May 27 2010
prev sibling parent reply Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> writes:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 On Thu, 27 May 2010 15:34:38 -0400, Don <nospam nospam.com> wrote:
 
 Votes however are definitely not ignored.
 If you search bugzilla, you'll find that there are 86 closed bugs which
 still have votes for them! Compared with 228 open bugs.
 So the votes themeselves are far from up-to-date.

Indeed, it would be nice if bugzilla reminded you that you have votes for closed bugs. Every time I go to vote for a bug, I remove my votes from any closed bugs (which are obvious with the strikethrough text). But I don't notice that until I go to vote for one. If it reminded me every time I logged in that I have votes for closed bugs, then I might pay better attention. -Steve

What is the purpose of votes for closed bugs anyway? Should they not just get removed automatically?
May 27 2010
next sibling parent Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Lutger wrote:
 Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
 
 On Thu, 27 May 2010 15:34:38 -0400, Don <nospam nospam.com> wrote:

 Votes however are definitely not ignored.
 If you search bugzilla, you'll find that there are 86 closed bugs which
 still have votes for them! Compared with 228 open bugs.
 So the votes themeselves are far from up-to-date.

closed bugs. Every time I go to vote for a bug, I remove my votes from any closed bugs (which are obvious with the strikethrough text). But I don't notice that until I go to vote for one. If it reminded me every time I logged in that I have votes for closed bugs, then I might pay better attention. -Steve

What is the purpose of votes for closed bugs anyway? Should they not just get removed automatically?

The bug might get reopened?
May 27 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Lutger wrote:
<snip>
 What is the purpose of votes for closed bugs anyway? Should they not just get
removed automatically?

On top of the reasons linked to in my previous reply: - Many of us would probably like to be able to see which bugs they voted for have recently been fixed. - Resolving a bug would reset its vote count to zero. And so if it's reopened, voting would have to start again from scratch. - As such, an unscrupulous person could remove all votes from a bug just by marking it resolved. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=308505 Stewart.
May 27 2010
prev sibling parent Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
Lutger Wrote:

 What is the purpose of votes for closed bugs anyway? Should they not just get
removed automatically?
 

May 28 2010
prev sibling parent Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Stewart Gordon wrote:
 Don wrote:
 <snip>
 IMHO, one of the most important bugs to fix is actually a spec bug:

 4056 Template instantiation with bare parameter not documented

Why single out that one?

Because it's a feature that is used in almost every non-trivial D2 program, and the spec gives no hint that it even exists. Without it, you can't even make sense of many of the Phobos docs. It's an absolute disaster for anyone taking a first look at the language -- something which we expect to happen frequently in the next few weeks.
May 27 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Thu, 27 May 2010 15:34:38 -0400, Don <nospam nospam.com> wrote:

 Votes however are definitely not ignored.
 If you search bugzilla, you'll find that there are 86 closed bugs which  
 still have votes for them! Compared with 228 open bugs.
 So the votes themeselves are far from up-to-date.

Indeed, it would be nice if bugzilla reminded you that you have votes for closed bugs. Every time I go to vote for a bug, I remove my votes from any closed bugs (which are obvious with the strikethrough text). But I don't notice that until I go to vote for one. If it reminded me every time I logged in that I have votes for closed bugs, then I might pay better attention. -Steve
May 27 2010
prev sibling parent "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Thu, 27 May 2010 18:09:48 -0400, Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com>  
wrote:

 Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
 <snip>
 Indeed, it would be nice if bugzilla reminded you that you have votes  
 for closed bugs.  Every time I go to vote for a bug, I remove my votes  
 from any closed bugs (which are obvious with the strikethrough text).   
 But I don't notice that until I go to vote for one.  If it reminded me  
 every time I logged in that I have votes for closed bugs, then I might  
 pay better attention.

Why do you feel the need to remove your votes from closed bugs when you're not about to place one on another bug? This has been discussed extensively on Mozilla's own bugzilla: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27553

I don't feel like pouring through a bugzilla discussion, but the reason is because I may have gone to vote for an issue, but found I was out of votes, and I want to keep my existing ones (or I had to cancel another bug vote in order to vote for the new one). At a later time when one of my voted-for bugs gets resolved, then I can vote for the issue I couldn't vote on, or removed my vote from. To this end, if bugzilla could remember bugs I "unofficially" voted for, that would be good too :) -Steve
May 27 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Masahiro Nakagawa" <repeatedly gmail.com> writes:
On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:50:14 +0900, Andrei Alexandrescu
<SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and  
 lately work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new  
 features and bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!

 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out on  
 trucks to bookstores.

 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and  
 issue a release on Monday. We're going public!


 Andrei

I think we need improvement of DDoc. Current DDoc doesn't keep up with D Spec(e.g. ignore attribute, pure, etc...).
May 26 2010
next sibling parent Brad Roberts <braddr slice-2.puremagic.com> writes:
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:

 On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:50:14 +0900, Andrei Alexandrescu
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:
 
 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and lately
 work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new features and
 bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!
 
 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out on
 trucks to bookstores.
 
 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and issue a
 release on Monday. We're going public!
 
 
 Andrei

I think we need improvement of DDoc. Current DDoc doesn't keep up with D Spec(e.g. ignore attribute, pure, etc...).

Fixes are generated at the rate Walter plus several other volunteers generate them. Care to add yourself to that set of volunteers? The source is fully available.. Bugzilla has a lot of issues to choose your favorite(s) from... Later, Brad
May 26 2010
prev sibling parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:
On 26/05/2010 21:14, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:
 On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:50:14 +0900, Andrei Alexandrescu
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:
 
 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and 
 lately work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new 
 features and bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!

 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out 
 on trucks to bookstores.

 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and 
 issue a release on Monday. We're going public!


 Andrei

I think we need improvement of DDoc. Current DDoc doesn't keep up with D Spec(e.g. ignore attribute, pure, etc...).

I very much agree with this. -- Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
May 28 2010
next sibling parent SHOO <zan77137 nifty.com> writes:
Bruno Medeiros さんは書きました:
 On 26/05/2010 21:14, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:
 On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:50:14 +0900, Andrei Alexandrescu
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and 
 lately work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new 
 features and bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!

 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out 
 on trucks to bookstores.

 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and 
 issue a release on Monday. We're going public!


 Andrei

Current DDoc doesn't keep up with D Spec(e.g. ignore attribute, pure, etc...).

I very much agree with this.

I agree too. DDoc really lacks details of D2's key features. And those features are not used even in Phobos. Therefore, the features that does not understand how to use. In particular, I paid attention to shared, but I could not have any good idea. Please make key features clear, and describe documentation. Otherwise, no one will bring even one problem up. I let Phobos support safe, and I enumerated some problems last time. See also: http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/phobos/2010-May/000488.html Following this, shared, Range, pure, nothrow, etc... should be used in fact, too, and should be evaluated.
May 28 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Bruno Medeiros wrote:
 On 26/05/2010 21:14, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:
 On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:50:14 +0900, Andrei Alexandrescu
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and 
 lately work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new 
 features and bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!

 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out 
 on trucks to bookstores.

 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and 
 issue a release on Monday. We're going public!


 Andrei

Current DDoc doesn't keep up with D Spec(e.g. ignore attribute, pure, etc...).

I very much agree with this.

Bug 3445 seems to be the most important.
May 28 2010
prev sibling parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:
On 28/05/2010 11:03, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
 On 26/05/2010 21:14, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:
 I think we need improvement of DDoc.
 Current DDoc doesn't keep up with D Spec(e.g. ignore  attribute, pure,
 etc...).

I very much agree with this.

Oops, my mind slipped. I actually misread that as "I think we need improvement of the D Documentation", namely the specification, and that's what I was agreeing with. Not that DDoc doesn't need to be improved as well, but its important to update the spec before much time passes by. It makes it harder for newbies to learn the language, or even people like me who where away from D and the NG for a long period of time, and are not familiar with all the latest changes. Sure, there is Andrei's book coming out, but a more succinct reference such as the spec is needed eventually. -- Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
Jun 03 2010
prev sibling parent "Masahiro Nakagawa" <repeatedly gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, 27 May 2010 05:47:50 +0900, Brad Roberts  
<braddr slice-2.puremagic.com> wrote:

 On Thu, 27 May 2010, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:

 On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:50:14 +0900, Andrei Alexandrescu
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 We've had a tremendous infusion of talent and energy in Phobos, and  

 work has picked up in unprecedented ways, both in terms of new  

 bug fixes. I can't say how happy I am about that!

 At the end of this starting week, on Friday May 28, TDPL will be out  

 trucks to bookstores.

 Let's make this week a bug fixing week for both dmd and Phobos, and  

 release on Monday. We're going public!


 Andrei

I think we need improvement of DDoc. Current DDoc doesn't keep up with D Spec(e.g. ignore attribute, pure, etc...).

Fixes are generated at the rate Walter plus several other volunteers generate them. Care to add yourself to that set of volunteers? The source is fully available.. Bugzilla has a lot of issues to choose your favorite(s) from... Later, Brad

Yes. I would like to fix dmd bugs. But, I don't understand dmd internal now :( Give me a more time.
May 26 2010