Fix Issue 17712 - [REG 2.074] [LINK] Undefined reference to std.conv.toChars!(10, char, 1, uint).toChars(uint)

[shove70]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17712#c15

[dlang-bot]

Thanks for your pull request and interest in making D better, @shove70! We are looking forward to reviewing it, and you should be hearing from a maintainer soon.
Please verify that your PR follows this checklist:

• My PR is fully covered with tests (you can see the annotated coverage diff directly on GitHub with CodeCov's browser extension
• My PR is as minimal as possible (smaller, focused PRs are easier to review than big ones)
• I have provided a detailed rationale explaining my changes
• New or modified functions have Ddoc comments (with Params: and Returns:)

Please see CONTRIBUTING.md for more information.

---

If you have addressed all reviews or aren't sure how to proceed, don't hesitate to ping us with a simple comment.

Bugzilla references

Auto-close	Bugzilla	Severity	Description
✓	17712	regression	[REG 2.074] [LINK] Undefined reference to std.conv.toChars!(10, char, 1, uint).toChars(uint)

Testing this PR locally

If you don't have a local development environment setup, you can use Digger to test this PR:

dub fetch digger
dub run digger -- build "master + phobos#6659"

[ghost]

There are other ways to fix it (https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17712#c11) which i would prefer. It's delicate because while there's another test case, this is still only a workaround for one of the case of a compiler bug.

[ghost]

This is a delicate issue. Also your PR is not well prepared anyway, title is not good. git commit message neither. "Update conv.d" is too vague.

[n8sh]

There are other ways to fix it (https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17712#c11) which i would prefer. It's delicate because while there's another test case, this is still only a workaround for one of the case of a compiler bug.

@bbasile I'm sympathetic to this but Issue #17712 has been open for a year without movement. I'm going to mark this 72h no objection -> merge. If another PR is made during that time it can go ahead. Otherwise I think the right thing to do is merge this, and if another solution is made in the future it can replace it.

[n8sh]

Note: current Win32 failure appears unrelated.