On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:18:40 UTC, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 10:04:48 UTC, Szymon Gatner
wrote:
On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 09:27:14 UTC, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 09:07:39 UTC, Szymon Gatner
wrote:
What about 32bit phobos? Last time I checked (2.067) only
x64 was distributed.
You have to compile it yourself. Use the win64 makefile and
replace the arch=64 with
arch=32mscoff.
For more details see here:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/learn/How_to_get_32mscoff_libraries_for_phobos_73980.html
Ah so that didn't change. Did you try it? Do you run hybrid
C++/D apps on Win (whether 32 or 64)?. Asking because last
time I tried it (Win x64 tho) writeln() call from D side
crashed app because stdio wasn't properly initialized even tho
rt_init() was successful.
I am running hybrid D/C++ apps. I found it to work best when
you give D the control over the main method, e.g. the program
entry point should be in D land. Then simply call a C++
function from there to initialize your c++ stuff.
I'm currently even running hybrid C++/D apps with dlls. E.g.
multiple D dlls + multiple C++ dlls loaded by a c++ main
program. But to do that I have heavy compiler + runtime
modifications which are not ready yet to do a PR for them.
Hi Benjamin
Would you be able to give a little more colour on what the limits
are of interoperability for C++ with DMD master or release ? As
I understand it destructors and constructors don't work, and
obviously it will get tricky passing structures and classes from
C++ libraries not ported to D.
Reason I ask is I am about to make a case to someone as to why we
should use D, and I don't want to make any unfounded claims. I
don't really know C++ myself, although my noddy test worked fine.
Thanks - and we should bring the doc page IP to date. At least
say that more works than currently described, as I am sure this
will be a factor in adoption.
Laeeth.
