On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 01:51:17 -0500, Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk>
wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 07:53 +0200, Era Scarecrow wrote:
On Monday, 13 August 2012 at 04:25:19 UTC, Marco Leise wrote:
> Am Mon, 13 Aug 2012 05:38:01 +0200
> schrieb Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com>:
>
>> On 8/13/12, bearophile <bearophileh...@lycos.com> wrote:
>> > http://blog.coldflake.com/posts/2012-08-09-On-the-fly-C%2B%2B.html
>>
>> http://dlang.org/rdmd.html
>
> Aw come on, that is not a shell
Isn't rdmd just a wrapper for the compiler, then calls the
compiled code (or previously saved version of it) afterwards?
(That's the impression I get anyways)
Shells such as Python, Scala, etc. are good for some one-off experiments
and tasks, but I think in general they are over-rated in general
usefulness. Much better for non-trivial experimentation is to have a
super-lightweight editor/execution. Groovy has GroovyConsole, Python has
IDLE. Personally I find Emacs/rdmd excellent as an experimentation
combination for D codes.
Here come the flames, but check out vim + the D Syntastic plugin.
(not you in particular. =P)
I have it set to check every time I save the file.
This, coupled with a barebones.d file, allows easy experimentation.
It highlights the error the line is on, and shows the error msg when
you are on that line.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
