Jan Jurzitza

probably: ``` + echo 'FAILED: HTML generation test failed: tests/issue196_double_auto' + failure=1 ``` and in the end it tests if failure == 1, in which case it exits with exit...

I saw streams existed as well, but this doesn't do what I expect: ```d struct Job { int workData; } void main(string[] args) @safe { // number of spawned OS...

> Also, this is a multi-producer-single-consumer queue, and you were using it completely opposite (single-producer-multi-consumer). Yes, had just been implemented correctly, it would have screamed at you, forcing you to...

I have also very roughly benchmarked overhead memory & time of concurrency here for your example:  nice and constant overhead (so RAM and time growing linearly with number of...

onDone should probably also be called onCancel then I think?

I'm currently working on minimizing it, but I got a bug from returning this from a function (using mir algebraic): ```d CompletionOptions completionProvider = { resolveProvider: doCompleteSnippets, triggerCharacters: [ ".",...

oh that issue is unrelated to concurrency though, I just found it because I had it in the dependencies, but didn't actually use it yet - just the dip1000 caused...

here if you want to try reducing it yourself as well, I'm currently starting to dustmite this code which already exhibits the dip1000 bug behavior: ```d /++ dub.sdl: name "dip1000-reduce"...

reduced code causing memory corruption: ```d // run with: dmd -dip1000 -debug -g -w -run bug.d struct S() { ulong[] payload; this(ulong[] value) { import core.lifetime; payload = forward!value; }...

bug opened in dmd: https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24242