Re: Current RDMD, please?

[Walter Bright]

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Andrej Mitrovic" <andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.343.1282068838.13841.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
But he's a Mac user! :p

Heh, that was exactly my thought ;)  I'm not a mac user (nearly-immediate 
obsolescence is one of the reasons I left the Mac world after giving OSX a 
serious try for a couple years). My primary OS is ten years old (unless you 
count service packs), and I'm perfectly happy with it (well, much more happy 
than I would be with the newer versions of it, like Win7 - I swear, MS's 
devs are getting to be like Mozilla's). 

I'm using a 10 year old Windows XP version, but the difference between the Mac 
world and the Windows world is Microsoft cares about legacy compatibility, and 
my experience with Mac OS X 10.4 .. 10.6 is that Apple goes out of their way to 
make it difficult to build backwards compatible binaries.

Take a look at the dmd makefiles for OS X. Worse, Apple's documentation on how 
to do this is contradictory and spread out over obscure web pages, so there's a 
fair amount of trial and error to get it set up right. (If Apple cared about 
this, there'd be nothing more than a switch to g++ along the lines of -osx=10.4 
and it'll do whatever is necessary to build a backward compatible binary.)

On the other hand, OS X upgrades tend to be cheap ($25) while Windows upgrades 
tend to be expensive (hundreds of $).