On 3/31/14, 10:06 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 24 March 2014 07:34, Iain Buclaw <ibuc...@gdcproject.org> wrote:
On 23 March 2014 19:28, Iain Buclaw <ibuc...@gdcproject.org> wrote:
On 23 March 2014 09:31, Johannes Pfau <nos...@example.com> wrote:
Am Sat, 22 Mar 2014 14:50:22 -0700
schrieb Brad Roberts <bra...@puremagic.com>:
On 3/22/14, 12:02 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 22 March 2014 18:20, Johannes Pfau <nos...@example.com> wrote:
See
https://d.puremagic.com/test-results/test_data.ghtml?projectid=2&runid=62582&logid=13
(Didn't see this in my local tests, it probably needs a complete
gdc rebuild to happen)
Hmm, didn't see that either.
Has the minimum base gcc version moved forward again?
I don't think that's the case here, at least there's no obvious change
that could require a newer snapshot.
In this case, it's a GCC GC bug.
Fix incoming.
Still failing with a second unrelated issue. Looks like wrong code
sent to back-end (trying to compile an ERROR_MARK) - I probably
exposed a couple wrong handling of errors in the backend through some
refactoring. What I might end up doing is submitting a new visitor
to walk all trees and assert if an error expression is found, that at
least safe guards me from having to put in workarounds to handle junk
codegen. :-)
Green again. I've also bumped the snapshot version to 20140330. :)
http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/?projectid=2
Good for the green. I'll add support for paying attention to that version file soonish.. but
probably not today.
