digitalmars.D - Re: Humble request Walter: Could you _please_ fix phobos already?
- acarion <thrust trust.com> Jul 18 2007
- "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> Jul 18 2007
- Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> Jul 18 2007
- "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> Jul 18 2007
- Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> Jul 18 2007
- Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> Jul 19 2007
- Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> Jul 22 2007
downs Wrote:I don't like Tango. Going by looks and usability alone, I'd far prefer to use Phobos. However, sometimes I run into trouble with Phobos, like sockets being broken in interesting ways, the connect function not being synchronized, lack of templates in std.string .. I'm sure many of you have had similar experiences. Those are not unbelievably complex and hard issues (like, for example, Macros) but mostly rather trivial things that could be fixed with a few lines of code. So I really have to ask - why are these issues not being fixed? Why is it that in a post-1.0 project, which should be largely bug-free and feature complete, I still have to debug the _standard library_? When writing code, there are a few basic assumptions that you have to make for the sake of efficiency, like what your tools are telling you is correct. That the standard library works as advertised is one of those assumptions. Why is it, that in a post-1.0 project, important parts of the GC, like generationalCollect, even though they are explicitly mentioned in the documentation, remain unimplemented? I really like D, and I also like Phobos. I think it would be sad if people who don't even particularly _like_ Tango would be pushed towards using it by problems that could have been solved. --downs PS: In a similar vein, some people have observed that longstanding bugs seem to be getting less attention these days. Perhaps it would be .. wise, before going off and adding new features which in turn introduce new bugs, to fix the old ones first?
Then make a patch and upload to bugzilla. Altough I have already done that, and the patch went completely ignored. Also, I found critical bug in the GC (back on DMD1.10, I think) that I posted and went unheard too.
Jul 18 2007
"acarion" <thrust trust.com> wrote in message news:f7m8ui$dfk$1 digitalmars.com...Then make a patch and upload to bugzilla. Altough I have already done that, and the patch went completely ignored. Also, I found critical bug in the GC (back on DMD1.10, I think) that I posted and went unheard too.
Most phobos patches and submissions are ignored.
Jul 18 2007
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:"acarion" <thrust trust.com> wrote in message news:f7m8ui$dfk$1 digitalmars.com...Then make a patch and upload to bugzilla. Altough I have already done that, and the patch went completely ignored. Also, I found critical bug in the GC (back on DMD1.10, I think) that I posted and went unheard too.
Most phobos patches and submissions are ignored.
Guys, please don't equate 'not responded to' or 'not yet fixed' with 'ignored'. It's a fallacy. Later, Brad
Jul 18 2007
"Brad Roberts" <braddr puremagic.com> wrote in message news:mailman.64.1184806108.16939.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...Guys, please don't equate 'not responded to' or 'not yet fixed' with 'ignored'. It's a fallacy.
Then maybe there needs to be a bugzilla issue status along the lines of "understood, but won't/can't get to it right away." Lack of official response to me reads as "as good as ignored," especially when there are issues with DMD and phobos which have been sitting in bugzilla, unresolved, some with patches, for over a year.
Jul 18 2007
Brad Roberts wrote:Jarrett Billingsley wrote:"acarion" <thrust trust.com> wrote in message news:f7m8ui$dfk$1 digitalmars.com...Then make a patch and upload to bugzilla. Altough I have already done that, and the patch went completely ignored. Also, I found critical bug in the GC (back on DMD1.10, I think) that I posted and went unheard too.
Most phobos patches and submissions are ignored.
Guys, please don't equate 'not responded to' or 'not yet fixed' with 'ignored'. It's a fallacy.
Ok ... Most phobos patches and submissions are examined with a fine-toothed comb and then anguished over in perpetuity by Walter. I don't think it matters much to the submitter whether it was "ignored" or "read and examined carefully without any follow-up action". The two look indistinguishable to the submitter. --bb
Jul 18 2007
Brad Roberts wrote:Jarrett Billingsley wrote:"acarion" <thrust trust.com> wrote in message news:f7m8ui$dfk$1 digitalmars.com...Then make a patch and upload to bugzilla. Altough I have already done that, and the patch went completely ignored. Also, I found critical bug in the GC (back on DMD1.10, I think) that I posted and went unheard too.
Most phobos patches and submissions are ignored.
Guys, please don't equate 'not responded to' or 'not yet fixed' with 'ignored'. It's a fallacy. Later, Brad
I wuv the halting problem. - Gregor Richards
Jul 19 2007
Gregor Richards wrote:Brad Roberts wrote:Jarrett Billingsley wrote:"acarion" <thrust trust.com> wrote in message news:f7m8ui$dfk$1 digitalmars.com...Then make a patch and upload to bugzilla. Altough I have already done that, and the patch went completely ignored. Also, I found critical bug in the GC (back on DMD1.10, I think) that I posted and went unheard too.
Most phobos patches and submissions are ignored.
Guys, please don't equate 'not responded to' or 'not yet fixed' with 'ignored'. It's a fallacy. Later, Brad
I wuv the halting problem. - Gregor Richards
LOOOOOOOOOOOL, well said :P -- Bruno Medeiros - MSc in CS/E student http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
Jul 22 2007