-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 229
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix gdc build and test failures #2795
Conversation
Having `-preview=in` in dflags without a platform specification leads to errors with gdc: ``` gdc: error: unrecognized command-line option ‘-preview=in’; did you mean ‘-fpreview=in’? ``` However, using the proper `-fpreview=in` for gdc causes an ICE: ``` /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/13/include/d/std/math/exponential.d:587:30: internal compiler error: in layout_aggregate_type, at d/types.cc:562 587 | enum maxOdd = pow(2.0L, real.mant_dig) - 1.0L; ``` Leave `-preview=in` enabled for dmd and ldc and wait for a fix before enabling it for gdc. Signed-off-by: Andrei Horodniceanu <a.horodniceanu@proton.me>
Gdc doesn't support `#include`s in importC Signed-off-by: Andrei Horodniceanu <a.horodniceanu@proton.me>
✅ PR OK, no changes in deprecations or warnings Total deprecations: 0 Total warnings: 0 Build statistics: statistics (-before, +after)
executable size=5228376 bin/dub
-rough build time=62s
+rough build time=61s Full build output
|
Are there bug reports? |
@ibuclaw I suppose you refer to the ICE. Here's what I get when trying to compile dub (using a manual command because of -Werror causing the build to fail sooner):
Looking at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla I found https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112285 and https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112290 which both have small reproducers and have a similar setup to the dub build failure, I don't know how to minimize such an error, nor do I have the time right now to do it, so all I did was remove the flag and add a comment saying why it was removed. I'm pretty new to this so, if you think my reasoning wasn't right, I will accept it and try not to do it in the future :) |
It's probably PR11285 then. |
No description provided.