What's up with GDC?

[Joerg Joergonson via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Sunday, 12 June 2016 at 09:11:09 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
> On Sunday, 12 June 2016 at 04:19:33 UTC, Joerg Joergonson wrote:
>> 
>> Here are the versions
>>
>> The one that isn't working:
>> LDC - the LLVM D compiler (30b1ed):
>>   based on DMD v2.071.1 and LLVM 3.9.0git-d06ea8a
>>   built with LDC - the LLVM D compiler (1.0.0)
>>   Default target: x86_64-pc-windows-msvc
>>   Host CPU: skylake
>>   http://dlang.org - http://wiki.dlang.org/LDC
>>
>> The one that is:
>> B:\DLang\ldc2\bin>ldc2 -version
>> LDC - the LLVM D compiler (1.0.0):
>>   based on DMD v2.070.2 and LLVM 3.9.0git
>>   built with LDC - the LLVM D compiler (1.0.0)
>>   Default target: i686-pc-windows-msvc
>>   Host CPU: skylake
>>   http://dlang.org - http://wiki.dlang.org/LDC
>
> The first one is a pre-alpha (!) version.
> The second one is our latest released version, which is the one 
> I recommend you to use.
>
> If you want your bugs to be noted and fixed, you should try 
> that test version and report bugs. That's kind of what you are 
> doing now, so thanks ;)  Of course, clarity in reporting is 
> important to get bugs fixed...

Ok. Well, I didn't know I was using an alpha version. Two bugs I 
have:

1. Paths(imports to subdirs as explained in my other posts) are 
not correct. It seems to be dropping the last '\'. Probably a 
simple substring range bug. (e.g., 1..$-2 instead of 1..$-1). 
Since it works in the previous version, it shouldn't be too hard 
to diff on the modules path resolution code.

2. There seems to be an issue with the x86 libs not being 
correctly resolved. The default is to choose x64. When I compile 
for x86 it still uses them. Maybe a compiler switch is needed, 
but regardless this isn't good practice. -m32 is being passed, 
maybe this should select the 32-bit configuration?

If these are regressions then someone needs to be fired!!! If 
not, someone still needs to be fired! Or at least be forced to 
buy me a ham burger or something!