[dmd-beta] dmd 1.062 and 2.047 beta

[Don Clugston]

On 10 June 2010 16:28, Steve Schveighoffer <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Whoa... it's not important to know what version of dmd a user was running when encountering a bug?  I think it's critically important!
>
> If someone submits a bug, and says "D2", and it's something that's already been fixed, you don't think it's worth knowing the version they used?  The next question is, "hm... I thought we fixed that, what version are you using?"  Lot's of time gets wasted when the version isn't specified.

That's untrue, for three reasons.
Firstly, and most importantly, the version information is indicated by
the date the bug was filed; people are almost always using the latest
version. Very occasionally, someone is using a very old version. (For
sure, they are not using a future version!)
Secondly, you cannot trust the version information. It is very often
incorrect. I've seen many regressions where the bug wasn't introduced
until one or two versions after the specified version. And that's the
only time when version information could potentially be useful.
Thirdly, if a bug has gone away, I always try to track down in which
release it was fixed, anyway. With a binary chop, you don't have to
test many releases to find it.

But by contrast, it's really dreadful that you cannot search for
D1-only bugs! This is a really important feature which is missing.

(BTW, the keywords could be a lot better, too. ice-on-valid-code and
ice-on-invalid-code should be merged. Because invalid code is valid
inside is(typeof()) expressions!).