[phobos] phobos commit, revision 2028

[David Simcha]

  Yea, I'm guilty of breaking the Linux builds.  I think a good 
enhancement to your auto testing system would be to have it 
automatically nag the Phobos list whenever something breaks (instead of 
you doing it manually).  The reasons why things slip through the cracks 
seem to be:

1.  Breaking platform-specific code for a platform you don't develop on.

2.  Bits of code in your tree that you never committed that you forgot 
about, that change the results.

Realistically, these things will always slip through the cracks once in 
a while, but when they do quick and automatic feedback is a Good Thing (TM).

On 9/18/2010 9:45 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
> I just tried building with link upgraded to the 8.00.7 beta.. no better.
>
> Guys, it's really important that all of these packages continue to build and
> pass their respective tests.  It seems like we can't go more than a day or so
> without something new being introduced that breaks something.
>
> I recognize that we're all volunteers here, but please be responsible for making
> sure your changes don't cause any platform to stop building and passing tests.
> It might well be that there's a lurking problem that's just surfaced somehow,
> but the bottom line is that being unable to build and run the tests successfully
> is a blocker for everyone.
>
> I also recognize that not everyone has access to more than one platform.  That's
> exactly one of the reasons I setup the auto build/test system.  Hopefully we'll
> get os/x and freebsd added soon.  Use it.. watch the results.
>
> In case your head has been in the sand, the url:
>      http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/
>
> Fix or revert.. file bugs.. figure out work arounds.. but don't leave broken.
>
> Please?
>
> Thanks,
> Brad
>
> On 9/18/2010 5:49 PM, David Simcha wrote:
>>   Yeh, I had experimentally added std.parallelism to my DMD directory and
>> compiled Phobos and encountered similar things.  When I ran the unittests for
>> std.parallelism by itself, they passed.  Whenever I ran them along with the rest
>> of Phobos, there was an access violation somewhere (I don't know where).  I
>> didn't say anything because I wasn't sure where the bug was at the time, and
>> didn't have a clue where to start tracking it down.
>>
>> On 9/18/2010 8:39 PM, Shin Fujishiro wrote:
>>> Brad Roberts<braddr at puremagic.com>   wrote:
>>>> The win32 phobos tests started failing after this submit.. with an access
>>>> violation.
>>>>
>>>> http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/test_data.ghtml?dataid=3525
>>> Probably it's related to the executable size.
>>>
>>> With the following pragma, I found that the access violation starts
>>> from about 82 instantiations of std.typecons.Tuple.
>>> ----------
>>> struct Tuple(Specs...)
>>> {
>>>       pragma(msg, "@@@");
>>> ...
>>> ----------
>>> Removing some Tuple instantiations in Tuple's unittests suppressed the
>>> access violation.  Try removing first two blocks in Tuple's unittests;
>>> phobos tests should succeed with no access violation.
>>>
>>> Or, run the tests without a random module.  For instance, inserting
>>> __EOF__ at the beginning of std/json.d fixes the access violation!
>>>
>>>
>>> My commit r2025 erased the body of a dummy function in Tuple.  I reckon
>>> that changeset could suppress the access violation thanks to smaller
>>> executable.  Now, another commit increased the size, and...
>>>
>>>
>>> Shin
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>