digitalmars.D.bugs - DStress report for DMD-0.127 -> DMD-0.128
- Thomas Kuehne <thomas-dloop kuehne.this-is-spam.cn> Jul 21 2005
- Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> Jul 22 2005
- =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Thomas_K=FChne?= <thomas-dloop kuehne.THISISSPAM.cn> Jul 22 2005
- Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> Jul 25 2005
- Thomas Kühne <Thomas_member pathlink.com> Jul 25 2005
- Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> Jul 25 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 DMD 0.127 -> DMD 0.128 (Linux) FAIL -> ERROR http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/with_13.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/o/opAssign_02_D.d XFAIL -> ERROR http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/__TIME__02.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/__TIMESTAMP__02.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/o/opAssign_01_A.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/o/opAssign_01_B.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/o/opAssign_02_A.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/o/opAssign_02_B.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/o/opAssign_03_A.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/o/cast_28.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/length_03.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/f/function_03.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/__FILE__02.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/d/delegate_15.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/__DATE__02.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/cast_10.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/associative_array_01.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/alias_16.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/alias_15.d Pass: 1396 (+33) XPass: 70 (+ 0) Fail: 187 (-14) XFail: 602 (-12) Error: 33 (- 4) hot spots: (217K) http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/dstress.html complete report: (1,5M) http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/results.html Thomas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQFC3+/G3w+/yD4P9tIRApaDAJ4pYsesbX9SIJr95jnwdFxT2xb+yACeJHC4 qwcXeD//IkLsru6XiURoEOg= =OiOS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jul 21 2005
Success rate up from 86.7% to 87.5% Stability rate down from 98.4% to 98.3% http://smjg.port5.com/pr/d/dstress.xls Are the figures for versions that have disappeared off the table still available anywhere? OK, so you may not have retested them recently, but the mere fact that some testcases have been added/changed/reclassified will have made a difference. And how are undefined testcases supposed to be listed? I see abstract_01 to 04 have just disappeared, but array_initialization_02 and array_initialization_17_A to C are still filed under run. They certainly should be displayed - highlighting ambiguities/inconsistencies in the spec is an essential part of helping to get the language up to scratch. Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Jul 22 2005
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Stewart Gordon schrieb:Success rate up from 86.7% to 87.5% Stability rate down from 98.4% to 98.3% http://smjg.port5.com/pr/d/dstress.xls Are the figures for versions that have disappeared off the table still available anywhere? OK, so you may not have retested them recently, but the mere fact that some testcases have been added/changed/reclassified will have made a difference.
The raw data is still available: http://dstress.kuehne.cn/raw_results How to create a result table: 1) download the test suite svn co http://dstress.kuehne.cn 2) compile (www/GenReport.java) javac GenReport.java 3) generate result table (raw_results) java cn.kuehne.dmd.dstress.GenReport linux-i686_dmd-0.093 linux-i686_dmd-0.095 ... > big_table.htmlAnd how are undefined testcases supposed to be listed? I see abstract_01 to 04 have just disappeared, but array_initialization_02 and array_initialization_17_A to C are still filed under run.
The documentation for the array_initialization test cases is logical consistent, but definitely requires a cleaner rewording. Thomas
Jul 22 2005
Thomas Kühne wrote: <snip>The documentation for the array_initialization test cases is logical consistent, but definitely requires a cleaner rewording.
I don't understand. How does http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DocComments/Arrays#Contradiction constitute logical consistency? Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Jul 25 2005
In article <dc2eit$1hbq$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Stewart Gordon says...Thomas Kühne wrote: <snip>The documentation for the array_initialization test cases is logical consistent, but definitely requires a cleaner rewording.
I don't understand. How does http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DocComments/Arrays#Contradiction constitute logical consistency?
"If any members of an array are initialized." I'll use an example to explain the context: type[3] a = [ 1:2, 3 ] => [type.init, 2, 3]; // legal int[3] a = [ 1:2, 3 ] => [??, 2, 3]; // illegal It nowhere says that the coder has to initialise all elements. Thus if the coder doesn't explicitly initialise some array members the compiler has to deal with them. The troublesome wording of the reasioning in the doc seems to cause some confusion. Thomas
Jul 25 2005
Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> Thomas Kühne wrote:In article <dc2eit$1hbq$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Stewart Gordon says...Thomas Kühne wrote: <snip>The documentation for the array_initialization test cases is logical consistent, but definitely requires a cleaner rewording.
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DocComments/Arrays#Contradiction constitute logical consistency?
"If any members of an array are initialized." I'll use an example to explain the context: type[3] a = [ 1:2, 3 ] => [type.init, 2, 3]; // legal int[3] a = [ 1:2, 3 ] => [??, 2, 3]; // illegal
Built-in types have default initialisers too. Moreover, read the sample code on that page again.It nowhere says that the coder has to initialise all elements. Thus if the coder doesn't explicitly initialise some array members the compiler has to deal with them.
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/memory.html#uninitializedarrays "Arrays are always initialized in D." So if what you say follows, then either int[3] a; would have to be illegal, or the words "If any members of an array are initialized" would be redundant. Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Jul 25 2005