On 25 November 2013 20:34, Iain Buclaw <ibuc...@gdcproject.org> wrote: > On 25 November 2013 19:35, Brad Roberts <bra...@puremagic.com> wrote: >> On 11/25/13 2:35 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote: >>> >>> On 25 November 2013 10:32, Iain Buclaw <ibuc...@gdcproject.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Yep, there's been some middle-end changes. Sorry, next time I'll give >>>> you heads up. >>>> >>>> ...Which, incidentally, might come very soon, as there are some other >>>> front-end breaking changes in the pipeline with a new wide-int.h >>>> header. >>>> >>> >>> >>> And the last GDC change has been untested (so far). >> >> >> Well, if you're not worried that the build/tests are broken, I probably >> shouldn't be either, but I am pondering on ways of increasing the visibility >> of the state of the system. The only 'no work to be done' state is a >> healthy green master branch. I'm considering adding a once every X days >> (daily, weekly, etc) status summary email with what open work there is to be >> done (broken master, open pulls, etc). >> >> I don't consider it right for master branches to be in a broken state, ever. >> But I don't own the code under test, so it's not up to me. :) >> > > It's a kind of special case thing. I'm currently doing this 2.064 > merge in small steps (just taking a monthly development snapshot and > working my way up because to merge the entire amount of changes is too > much to track down breakages). So it's merge, push, run testsuite, > get things stable, repeat at the moment, and will be until 2.064 merge > is complete.
Testsuite should be passing now on latest gdc head and gcc snapshots. Until the next D frontend merge gets done sometime tomorrow.
