dmd 2.064.2

[Jonathan Crapuchettes]

On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 20:37:56 +0000, Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 20:27:01 +0000, Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 05 Nov 2013 14:08:50 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
>> 
>>> Ok, this is it:
>>> 
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.i386.rpm
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_i386.deb
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2.exe
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.zip
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.dmg
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_i386.deb
>> 
>> First, I would like to thank everyone who has put hard work into the
>> latest release and am really excited about the enhancements and fixed
>> bugs.
>> 
>> Second, I agree with others that this should have been 2.064, not
>> 2.064.2. This is an initial release not a patch/minor release.
>> 
>> Third, the fix for the issue at https://d.puremagic.com/issues/
>> show_bug.cgi?id=10690 was not included in the release and is a blocking
>> bug for my company's code base. Till there is a new release with that
>> fix included, we will not be able to use 2.064.
>> 
>> Many thanks again for a great programming language,
>> Jonathan from EMSI
> 
> I just double checked the code in issue 10690 and it works just fine. I
> had assumed that my code was similar enough to not have been worth an
> additional bug report. I was wrong. I'll log a bug report and try to
> work around the assertion failure in std.algorithm.
> 
> Thanks again,
> Jonathan

Disregard the last post. The issue still exists; I was just looking at 
the wrong file.