Re: DDL should become official part of DMD

2009-09-11 Thread teo
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 04:31:18 +0200, BLS wrote:

 JPF wrote:
 BLS wrote:
 c topic.. what do you think ?

 IMO : this could be a D killer feature.
 
 I don't know how complicated that would be (licensing issues, ...), but
 as a developer / user I would really like it: It's needed to implement
 stuff like addins in a convenient way. And it would be great if we
 could finally use statically loaded shared libraries instead of static
 compilation of everything (I guess that needs compiler integration, so
 it's a good reason to include DDL with dmd ;-)). Also, if you look at
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dll.html#Dcode the current way to do D
 DLLs for use with D code is not very developer friendly. Exporting flat
 functions like getMyClass just doesn't feel right. Now compare that
 with DDLs features: http://www.dsource.org/projects/ddl/wiki/AboutDDL
 .DDL clearly wins. By the way, I guess most of you know that already,
 but http://h3.team0xf.com/devlog/?p=12 has an updated version of DDL
 with a new linker.
 
 I can hear you , but it seems that we are pretty alone. License ?

I'm all for it.


Re: DDL should become official part of DMD

2009-09-08 Thread Christopher Wright

BLS wrote:

JPF wrote:

BLS wrote:

c topic.. what do you think ?

IMO : this could be a D killer feature.


I don't know how complicated that would be (licensing issues, ...), but
as a developer / user I would really like it: It's needed to implement
stuff like addins in a convenient way. And it would be great if we could
finally use statically loaded shared libraries instead of static
compilation of everything (I guess that needs compiler integration, so
it's a good reason to include DDL with dmd ;-)). Also, if you look at
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dll.html#Dcode the current way to do D
DLLs for use with D code is not very developer friendly. Exporting flat
functions like getMyClass just doesn't feel right. Now compare that with
DDLs features: http://www.dsource.org/projects/ddl/wiki/AboutDDL .DDL
clearly wins. By the way, I guess most of you know that already, but
http://h3.team0xf.com/devlog/?p=12 has an updated version of DDL with a
new linker.


I can hear you , but it seems that we are pretty alone.


DDL showed signs of offering a proper reflection library. I'm drooling a 
bit over the possibility.


Re: DDL should become official part of DMD

2009-09-07 Thread Jesse Phillips
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 04:31:18 +0200, BLS wrote:

 I can hear you , but it seems that we are pretty alone.

I can see the benefits from this, doesn't silence on these boards 
generally mean agreement? :)


Re: DDL should become official part of DMD

2009-09-06 Thread BLS

JPF wrote:

BLS wrote:

c topic.. what do you think ?

IMO : this could be a D killer feature.


I don't know how complicated that would be (licensing issues, ...), but
as a developer / user I would really like it: It's needed to implement
stuff like addins in a convenient way. And it would be great if we could
finally use statically loaded shared libraries instead of static
compilation of everything (I guess that needs compiler integration, so
it's a good reason to include DDL with dmd ;-)). Also, if you look at
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dll.html#Dcode the current way to do D
DLLs for use with D code is not very developer friendly. Exporting flat
functions like getMyClass just doesn't feel right. Now compare that with
DDLs features: http://www.dsource.org/projects/ddl/wiki/AboutDDL .DDL
clearly wins. By the way, I guess most of you know that already, but
http://h3.team0xf.com/devlog/?p=12 has an updated version of DDL with a
new linker.


I can hear you , but it seems that we are pretty alone.
License ?
The compiler deps stuff is coming out of the same developer house... 
...without trouble..


... now DMD comes along with such a license MIX nobody really 
understands but W. insist that everything else has to be public domain.

That stinks 



Re: DDL should become official part of DMD

2009-09-06 Thread Tim_M
BLS Wrote:

 JPF wrote:
  BLS wrote:
  c topic.. what do you think ?
 
  IMO : this could be a D killer feature.
  
  I don't know how complicated that would be (licensing issues, ...), but
  as a developer / user I would really like it: It's needed to implement
  stuff like addins in a convenient way. And it would be great if we could
  finally use statically loaded shared libraries instead of static
  compilation of everything (I guess that needs compiler integration, so
  it's a good reason to include DDL with dmd ;-)). Also, if you look at
  http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dll.html#Dcode the current way to do D
  DLLs for use with D code is not very developer friendly. Exporting flat
  functions like getMyClass just doesn't feel right. Now compare that with
  DDLs features: http://www.dsource.org/projects/ddl/wiki/AboutDDL .DDL
  clearly wins. By the way, I guess most of you know that already, but
  http://h3.team0xf.com/devlog/?p=12 has an updated version of DDL with a
  new linker.
 
 I can hear you , but it seems that we are pretty alone.

I didn't want to say much but I actually would like this a lot.

I can't see how this will negatively effect anything else unlike language 
features so it is kind of on the level of the patch for build tools integrated 
in 2.031 IIRC.

I guess if someone other than Walter could do the development then he probably 
wouldn't mind applying the patches.





Re: DDL should become official part of DMD

2009-09-05 Thread JPF
BLS wrote:
 c topic.. what do you think ?
 
 IMO : this could be a D killer feature.

I don't know how complicated that would be (licensing issues, ...), but
as a developer / user I would really like it: It's needed to implement
stuff like addins in a convenient way. And it would be great if we could
finally use statically loaded shared libraries instead of static
compilation of everything (I guess that needs compiler integration, so
it's a good reason to include DDL with dmd ;-)). Also, if you look at
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dll.html#Dcode the current way to do D
DLLs for use with D code is not very developer friendly. Exporting flat
functions like getMyClass just doesn't feel right. Now compare that with
DDLs features: http://www.dsource.org/projects/ddl/wiki/AboutDDL .DDL
clearly wins. By the way, I guess most of you know that already, but
http://h3.team0xf.com/devlog/?p=12 has an updated version of DDL with a
new linker.


DDL should become official part of DMD

2009-09-04 Thread BLS

c topic.. what do you think ?

IMO : this could be a D killer feature.