[phobos] Any reason we're not ready for a release?

[Max Samukha]

On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Don Clugston <dclugston at googlemail.com>wrote:

> On 5 May 2011 20:14, Max Samukha <maxsamukha at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 5/4/2011 9:17 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> >> > > The one thing that I'm aware of that was a problem thanks to Don's
> >> > > CTFE
> >> > > changes which I don't know whether it was fixed or not was QtD.
> IIRC,
> >> > > Max
> >> > > was saying that it was seriously broken earlier. There's a good
> chance
> >> > > that it's fine now, but I think that we should make sure that QtD is
> >> > > no
> >> > > longer failing to build due to the CTFE changes.
> >> >
> >> > I folded in patches to dmd requested by Qt. If there are other issues
> >> > with
> >> > Qt, are they in bugzilla?
> >>
> >> No, I don't believe so. I just recall that when the recent CTFE changes
> >> came
> >> up in one of the threads in the main newsgroup, and I mentioned that
> they
> >> were
> >> still broken, because my recent changes to std.datetime weren't
> compiling,
> >> Max
> >> said that they were causing a lot of failures for QtD as well.
> >
> >
> > There is a confusion somewhere. I have been distracted from QtD recently
> and
> > have not followed the NG either. Unless I sleepwalk, I couldn't try Don's
> > CTFE changes.
> >
> >>
> >> I doubt that he
> >> would have created a bug report though, given that Don was in the middle
> >> of
> >> his changes. It's quite possible that it compiles fine now though. I
> just
> >> think that it should be verified that the CTFE changes are now stable
> >> enough
> >> that QtD is no longer failing to build because of them as it was before.
> >> Much
> >> as Don's changes are definitely something that we want, they risk
> causing
> >> serious regressions if we're not careful.
> >
> > I have just tried to build the public branch of QtD with a recent dmd
> > (
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/3fcc2344681ab9d31d1897188f36051c9beb247f
> )
> > on linux. The build has completed without errors.
> >
> > http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3516 remains critical.
>
> 3516 is fixed AFAIK. Do you have a test case that still fails?
>

I don't know. My development branch is in the middle of a big change. It
will take some time to complete the change. Then I will remove workarounds
for 3516 in the unittests and see whether they all pass.


> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/phobos/attachments/20110505/4aafa1bb/attachment.html>