www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - Beta 2.089.0

reply Martin Nowak <code+news.digitalmars dawg.eu> writes:
Glad to announce the first beta for the 2.089.0 release, ♥ to the 44 
contributors.

http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta
http://dlang.org/changelog/2.089.0.html

As usual please report any bugs at
https://issues.dlang.org

-Martin
Oct 16 2019
next sibling parent Martin Nowak <code dawg.eu> writes:
On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:

 Glad to announce the first beta for the 2.089.0 release, ♥ to 
 the 44 contributors.


Second beta is live now.


 http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta
 http://dlang.org/changelog/2.089.0.html

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin
Oct 24 2019
prev sibling next sibling parent Vladimir Panteleev <thecybershadow.lists gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:

 Glad to announce the first beta for the 2.089.0 release, ♥ to 
 the 44 contributors.

 http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta
 http://dlang.org/changelog/2.089.0.html

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin


Martin, DMD has been unbuildable from ZIP files for many releases 
now. This has been reported to Bugzilla a while ago and has been 
asked about on the forum a few times. Could you please look into 
it?

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18791
Oct 24 2019
prev sibling next sibling parent reply baz <b2.temp gmx.com> writes:
On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin


Hi, I've tested my old stuff and found 2 regs.

One deprecation in phobos due to Nullable.get and that was not 
detected and some weird linking errors, maybe due to typeinfo.

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20327
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20328
Oct 27 2019
parent reply baz <b2.temp gmx.com> writes:
On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 12:59:52 UTC, baz wrote:

 On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak 
 wrote:

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin


 Hi, I've tested my old stuff and found 2 regs.

 One deprecation in phobos due to Nullable.get and that was not 
 detected and some weird linking errors, maybe due to typeinfo.

 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20327
 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20328


Only 20328 is valid actually.
Oct 27 2019
parent reply drug <drug2004 bk.ru> writes:
27.10.2019 17:20, baz пишет:

 On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 12:59:52 UTC, baz wrote:

 On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin


 Hi, I've tested my old stuff and found 2 regs.

 One deprecation in phobos due to Nullable.get and that was not 
 detected and some weird linking errors, maybe due to typeinfo.

 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20327
 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20328


 
 Only 20328 is valid actually.


I confirm the bugs related to Nullable.get (I have another one). I have 
no the reduced case but there are definitly issues with deprecated 
Nullable.get
Oct 27 2019
parent reply baz <b2.temp gmx.com> writes:
On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 15:04:34 UTC, drug wrote:

 27.10.2019 17:20, baz пишет:

 On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 12:59:52 UTC, baz wrote:

 On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak 
 wrote:

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin


 Hi, I've tested my old stuff and found 2 regs.

 One deprecation in phobos due to Nullable.get and that was 
 not detected and some weird linking errors, maybe due to 
 typeinfo.

 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20327
 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20328


 
 Only 20328 is valid actually.


 I confirm the bugs related to Nullable.get (I have another 
 one). I have no the reduced case but there are definitly issues 
 with deprecated Nullable.get


According to a little investigation the message would be caused 
by this unittest [1].

I would suggest to disable it (using version(none)) or to extract 
it from the struct to the global scope. It's not recommended to 
add unittest blocks in templatized types anyway, because when the 
test is not dependent on the template params, like here, it's 
always the same that gets executed for each instance.

[1]: 
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/blob/master/std/typecons.d#L2889-L2897
Oct 27 2019
parent reply baz <b2.temp gmx.com> writes:
On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 16:38:30 UTC, baz wrote:

 On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 15:04:34 UTC, drug wrote:

 27.10.2019 17:20, baz пишет:

 On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 12:59:52 UTC, baz wrote:

 On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak 
 wrote:

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin


 Hi, I've tested my old stuff and found 2 regs.

 One deprecation in phobos due to Nullable.get and that was 
 not detected and some weird linking errors, maybe due to 
 typeinfo.

 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20327
 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20328


 
 Only 20328 is valid actually.


 I confirm the bugs related to Nullable.get (I have another 
 one). I have no the reduced case but there are definitly 
 issues with deprecated Nullable.get


 According to a little investigation the message would be caused 
 by this unittest [1].

 I would suggest to disable it (using version(none)) or to 
 extract it from the struct to the global scope. It's not 
 recommended to add unittest blocks in templatized types anyway, 
 because when the test is not dependent on the template params, 
 like here, it's always the same that gets executed for each 
 instance.

 [1]: 
 https://github.com/dlang/phobos/blob/master/std/typecons.d#L2889-L2897


BTW you're not allowed to do that

// Issue 19799
 safe unittest
{
     import std.format : format;

     const Nullable!string a = const(Nullable!string)();

     format!"%s"(a.get); // added .get here
}

because the Nullable is in a null state, .get call crash the 
program in assert mode.
Maybe you should revert the whole stuff ? What does the author of 
the deprecation think about this case ("feep" IIRC ) ?
Oct 27 2019
parent reply FeepingCreature <feepingcreature gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 16:50:00 UTC, baz wrote:

 On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 16:38:30 UTC, baz wrote:

 On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 15:04:34 UTC, drug wrote:

 27.10.2019 17:20, baz пишет:

 On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 12:59:52 UTC, baz wrote:

 On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak 
 wrote:

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin


 Hi, I've tested my old stuff and found 2 regs.

 One deprecation in phobos due to Nullable.get and that was 
 not detected and some weird linking errors, maybe due to 
 typeinfo.

 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20327
 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20328


 
 Only 20328 is valid actually.


 I confirm the bugs related to Nullable.get (I have another 
 one). I have no the reduced case but there are definitly 
 issues with deprecated Nullable.get


 According to a little investigation the message would be 
 caused by this unittest [1].

 I would suggest to disable it (using version(none)) or to 
 extract it from the struct to the global scope. It's not 
 recommended to add unittest blocks in templatized types 
 anyway, because when the test is not dependent on the template 
 params, like here, it's always the same that gets executed for 
 each instance.

 [1]: 
 https://github.com/dlang/phobos/blob/master/std/typecons.d#L2889-L2897


 BTW you're not allowed to do that

 // Issue 19799
  safe unittest
 {
     import std.format : format;

     const Nullable!string a = const(Nullable!string)();

     format!"%s"(a.get); // added .get here
 }

 because the Nullable is in a null state, .get call crash the 
 program in assert mode.
 Maybe you should revert the whole stuff ? What does the author 
 of the deprecation think about this case ("feep" IIRC ) ?


Yeah that's a non-fix. It's a blind replacement of "a" with 
"a.get" that ignores the fact that Nullable!string has its own 
toString, ie. this is one of the cases where the `a.get` is 
actually not triggered at runtime. The fact that the deprecation 
still triggers is an issue with traits that has no clear and 
obvious solution. (I advocate Adam's approach of just disabling 
deprecations in traits outright.)
Oct 28 2019
parent FeepingCreature <feepingcreature gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 29 October 2019 at 06:06:56 UTC, FeepingCreature 
wrote:

 On Sunday, 27 October 2019 at 16:50:00 UTC, baz wrote:

 What does the author of the deprecation think about this case 
 ("feep" IIRC ) ?


 Yeah that's a non-fix. It's a blind replacement of "a" with 
 "a.get" that ignores the fact that Nullable!string has its own 
 toString, ie. this is one of the cases where the `a.get` is 
 actually not triggered at runtime. The fact that the 
 deprecation still triggers is an issue with traits that has no 
 clear and obvious solution. (I advocate Adam's approach of just 
 disabling deprecations in traits outright.)


I take it back. Actually on looking into it deeper, while the 
general issue is gnarly, the solution to the *specific issue* in 
the bug report is very simple, lol.

PR up: https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/7257
Oct 28 2019
prev sibling parent Martin Nowak <code dawg.eu> writes:
On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 06:02:33 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:

 Glad to announce the first beta for the 2.089.0 release, ♥ to 
 the 44 contributors.

 http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta
 http://dlang.org/changelog/2.089.0.html

 As usual please report any bugs at
 https://issues.dlang.org

 -Martin


Release candidate is live now, website should get updated soon.
Oct 27 2019