www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - It's interesting how many old bugzilla issues are still open though

reply Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
I just searched for the keyword patch to see how many tickets are still  
open with submitted patches:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?keywords=patch&query_format=advanced&keywords_type=allwords&order=Last%20Changed&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED

Some date back to dmd 0.164 and one even is for gdc! Shouldn't those be  
closed to keep the system clean?
Feb 04 2010
next sibling parent reply "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"Trass3r" <un known.com> wrote in message 
news:op.u7molquq3ncmek hoenir.fem.tu-ilmenau.de...
I just searched for the keyword patch to see how many tickets are still 
open with submitted patches:
 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?keywords=patch&query_format=advanced&keywords_type=allwords&order=Last%20Changed&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED

 Some date back to dmd 0.164 and one even is for gdc! Shouldn't those be 
 closed to keep the system clean?

Just because there's a patch submitted doesn't mean it's been accepted and incorporated into DMD.
Feb 04 2010
parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 "Trass3r" <un known.com> wrote in message 

 Some date back to dmd 0.164 and one even is for gdc! Shouldn't those be 
 closed to keep the system clean?

Just because there's a patch submitted doesn't mean it's been accepted and incorporated into DMD.

That depends on whether by "closed" the OP means fixed or merely marked as such. They definitely should be fixed by folding in the patches sooner rather than later. Stewart.
Feb 04 2010
parent reply Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Stewart Gordon wrote:
 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 "Trass3r" <un known.com> wrote in message 

 Some date back to dmd 0.164 and one even is for gdc! Shouldn't those 
 be closed to keep the system clean?

Just because there's a patch submitted doesn't mean it's been accepted and incorporated into DMD.

That depends on whether by "closed" the OP means fixed or merely marked as such. They definitely should be fixed by folding in the patches sooner rather than later. Stewart.

Yes, but look at how many of the patches are marked as 'enhancement'. Most of the old patches have problems of various kinds: they are incorrect or incomplete, but still useful. The problem is with the bugzilla keywords. We need something like a 'partial-patch' keyword. In fact the current set of keywords is *far* from ideal, and the version selection is really terrible.
Feb 05 2010
parent Don <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Trass3r wrote:
 The problem is with the bugzilla keywords. We need something like a 
 'partial-patch' keyword. In fact the current set of keywords is *far* 
 from ideal, and the version selection is really terrible.

I know it's probably infeasible but just imagine an automatic system that tests stuff like versions and OSs. It would have all recent versions of dmd installed and automatically test code on different configurations ;) I mean the basics work for codepad.org, online compilation to show the compiler messages.

The version information is just not useful. There are only 3 useful versions: D1 only, D2 only, and both. Bugzilla's full of comments by people worrying about how they had to select 1.045 because 1.046 wasn't in the list yet. But it's completely useful information. (If you ever needed the compiler version (which you never do), you can estimate the compiler version from the date the bug was submitted).
Feb 05 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
 Yes, but look at how many of the patches are marked as 'enhancement'.
 Most of the old patches have problems of various kinds: they are  
 incorrect or incomplete, but still useful.
 The problem is with the bugzilla keywords. We need something like a  
 'partial-patch' keyword. In fact the current set of keywords is *far*  
 from ideal, and the version selection is really terrible.

The whole thing wasn't so much about the patch ones, I just found them cause I searched for issues with patches. My point was that some entries are damn old and sometimes it's ridiculous that they are still open (e.g. the first one about the makefiles). Some patches are also rather small, just like this one: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2997 Just tried it out, works great.
Feb 05 2010
prev sibling parent Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
 The problem is with the bugzilla keywords. We need something like a  
 'partial-patch' keyword. In fact the current set of keywords is *far*  
 from ideal, and the version selection is really terrible.

I know it's probably infeasible but just imagine an automatic system that tests stuff like versions and OSs. It would have all recent versions of dmd installed and automatically test code on different configurations ;) I mean the basics work for codepad.org, online compilation to show the compiler messages.
Feb 05 2010