Re: Adam Wilson is now a GSoC 2012 mentor!

[Andrew Wiley]

On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Jacob Carlborg  wrote:

> On 2012-05-18 19:20, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>
>  I agree, this idea to write a proper, *fully-featured* IDE in D is
>> simply totally unrealistic. If it's just a D editor with some IDE
>> functionality, sure, someone can toy around and try to work on that, but
>> as for a proper IDE, there is just so much functionality and
>> infrastructure that platforms like Eclipse, Visual Studio, MonoDevelop,
>> Netbeans, etc., provide that is dumb and futile to try replicate all of
>> that in D. There are years of paid, multi-developer teams work behind
>> that infrastructure, and you want one or two guys to replicate that in
>> their free time? Right.
>> We don't even have a mature, fleshed-out D GUI library, let alone IDE
>> infrastructure...
>>
>>
> Half of Eclipse is ported to D :)
>
> https://github.com/d-widget-**toolkit


Half of Eclipse ~4-6 years ago ported to D.
That certainly doesn't make it not useful, but DWT hasn't managed to keep
up with Eclipse.

Re: Dsource

[Andrew Wiley]

Looks up from here.

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 9:14 AM, bioinfornatics
 wrote:
> Dsource is down since yesterday someone can do something please?
> I need checkout latest gtkd release!
>
> thanks
>

Re: Visual D 0.3.30 released: Code completion from semantic analysis on the horizon

[Andrew Wiley]

On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rainer Schuetze  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to announce the release of a new version of Visual D.
>
> Visual D is a Visual Studio package providing both project management and
> language services for the D programming language. It works with Visual
> Studio 2005-2010 and 11 as well as the free Visual Studio Shells.
>
> Highlights of this version 0.3.30 include
>
> - syntax highlighting improvements regarding scope(guard), __ctfe, is, in
> and predefined versions
> - added checkbox for options -gs and -property to project configuration
> - debugger and build improvements
> - experimental: code completion and tool tips from semantic analysis of
> source code
>
> See http://www.dsource.org/projects/visuald/wiki/VersionHistory for a full
> list of changes.
>
> The code completion from semantic analysis is not complete yet, but I think
> it can already be very helpful. You'll have to enable it explicitly in the D
> Language options due to it's experimental status.
>
> The Visual D installer can be downloaded from its website at
> http://www.dsource.org/projects/visuald
>
> Have fun,
> Rainer

Exciting! I just installed it, and I'll try it out with my latest project.

Re: dmd 2.057 release

[Andrew Wiley]

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Sean Cavanaugh
 wrote:
> On 1/3/2012 1:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> On 1/3/2012 10:55 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03-01-2012 19:47, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 1/3/2012 6:49 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>
> Perhaps some kind of experimental releases would be better. It could
> help
> getting new features out to the community (and thus tested) faster.


 We call them betas .

 But anyone can pull the latest from github and use it, many do.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's not very practical for most users. Some kind of
>>> ready-to-download builds
>>> would be much better. As others suggested, the auto-tester publishing
>>> builds for
>>> download would be ideal.
>>
>>
>> Using a nightly build is not very practical for most users, either,
>> probably the same group.
>
>
> Well there is always the google (and mozilla) route of force-feeding the
> latest binaries to everyone :)

They can get away with that because their users don't really care
about versions. As long as Chrome starts and browses when I want it
to, I don't care whether Google pushes updates out behind my back.
Development tools are a different game because versions introduce
breaking changes and silently changing versions will just create a
horde of angry developers.

Re: Release: MinGW GCC 4.6.1 GDC 1.070/2,.055

[Andrew Wiley]

On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Daniel Green  wrote:
> On 12/11/2011 2:39 AM, bearophile wrote:
>>
>> I feel stupid -.-
>
> Sorry, it's really a packaging issue.  Switching GDC to target i686 changed
> some library and exectuable paths resulting in these issues.
>
>
>
>> I'd like a single zip/rar/7zip with all needed files inside, with GCC too
>> :-)
>
> That could be done but I never liked the idea of requiring multiple GCC
> installations on any system.  That's why I chose this path.
>
> I've repackaged and tested it from a clean install.
>
> https://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/downloads/gcc-4.6.1-tdm-1-gdc-7e22befef29c-20111211.7z
>

This one works for me on TDM GCC. I had the same gmp problem with the last one.

It seems calling spawn() in std.concurrency causes a segfault, but
that's a separate issue.

Re: [Phoronix] Merging In The GNU D Language Compiler To GCC

[Andrew Wiley]

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Iain Buclaw  wrote:
> My worst kept secret is out.
>
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTk2NA
>

:D x 1000

Re: dmd 1.069 and 2.054 release

[Andrew Wiley]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> On 2011-07-11 13:50, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > "Jonathan M Davis"  wrote in message
> > news:mailman.1539.1310416341.14074.digitalmars-d-annou...@puremagic.com.
> ..
> >
> > > On 2011-07-11 13:09, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > >> Not that I feel strongly about it, but just like "scheduled for
> > >> deprication", actual warnings are things that *are* valid code, too.
> Ie,
> > >> they're just messages, too. The whole point of a "warnings as errors"
> > >> setting is that some people want that extra help to ensure their code
> is
> > >> perfectly pristine. (Although, personally, I've never seen
> particularly
> > >> strong reason for "warnings as errors" settings anyway.)
> > >>
> > >> To be clear, if we did have some "deprecated(scheduled)" feature and
> it
> > >> was
> > >> non-fatal even with -w, I wouldn't personally have a huge problem with
> > >> it (I never use -w anyway, just -wi). I just don't think it's so
> > >> clear-cut that "scheduled for deprication" doesn't essentially amount
> > >> to a warning.
> > >
> > > Hmm. The main problem with making the scheduled for deprecation
> messages
> > > being
> > > treated as errors with -w is that if you build with -w (as a lot of
> > > people do), it breaks your code. And the point of the message is to
> warn
> > > you that your code is _going_ to break and to _avoid_ causing immediate
> > > breakage.
> >
> > If someone doesn't want warning conditions to break their code, they
> should
> > be using -wi, not -w.
>
> Yes. But the problem is that the "scheduled for deprecation" messages are
> not
> supposed to _ever_ break code. And since warnings aren't normally added
> very
> often, compiling with -w shouldn't cause your code to suddenly break.
> Granted,
> dmd is still unstable enough that such changes do occur, but once it's
> fully
> stable, it wouldn't happen very often. But anyone can schedule something
> for
> deprecation in any library, and the whole point of _scheduling_ the
> deprecation instead of just deprecating it is to avoid breaking code. So,
> it's
> unacceptable for scheduling something for deprecation to be an error with
> -w.
> It's informational only. Warnings are _not_ only informational. They're
> telling you that there's actually something wrong with your code. It's just
> not wrong enough to be against the language spec and therefore always be an
> error. Scheduling something for deprecation is indicating that the symbol
> in
> question will be deprecated in the future and that you should change it
> before
> that happens. Your code is still fine, and it should still compile.
>
> Bottom line. Marking something as "scheduled for deprecation" should
> _never_
> break code no matter what flags you use to compile your code. Otherwise,
> there's no point to it, and we'd just be deprecating stuff immediately.


I would argue that when you compile with -w (and explicitly -w, not -wi),
you're explicitly asking the compiler to break your code for warnings, and I
believe that should include code scheduled for deprecation. By specifying
-w, you're explicitly asking the compiler to check your code more strictly,
and I see more aggressive deprecation as an acceptable part of that.

To paraphrase your description, there's something that's about to break in
your code, but it's not broken yet, so if you drop -w (or switch to -wi),
you can still build it. If we're taking the approach that warnings break
code when -w is used, I see scheduled deprecations falling into a very
similar category.

And no, this change doesn't obsolete code deprecation, it simply extends the
higher standards that -w holds you to into the library space. If you don't
want "scheduled for deprecation" to break your code, use -wi. You'll get all
the same noise you got before, just without the breakage.

Re: D programming language specification ebook

[Andrew Wiley]

On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 1:01 AM, Russel Winder  wrote:

> On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 22:36 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
> [ . . . ]
> > I understand, and I'll see about generating a pdf.
>
> Thanks.
>
> > However, although the e-readers can read pdf's, they do so very badly,
> because
> > pdf's are designed for 8*11.5 paper, and will not reflow the text for the
> > smaller screens.
>
> Well PDF isn't designed for 8x11.5 per se, the page size can be anything
> you want, but it is fixed.
>
> (I wonder when the USA, Canada and Mexico will drop their non-standard
> paper sizes and use ISO standard ones.  OK never, I know :-(
>
> > There's gotta be an e-reader for Linux. .mobi files are a standard as far
> as I
> > can tell.
>
> FBReader is there.  Thanks Jordi for pointing this out.


I've generally used Calibre as my e-reader on Linux (and Windows), and it
will most likely work as well. I'll be trying it in the near future.
It can also convert nearly any format to nearly any other format.

Re: TDPL is an Amazon Kindle bestseller

[Andrew Wiley]

On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Charles Hixson <
> charleshi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Considering that Amazon has the proven capability of removing a book from
>> your Kindle after you've bought it, I don't expect that I'll EVER decide to
>> invest in a Kindle.  Some other e-book reader is a possibility.  The Nook
>> has certain interesting features, and there's one that would be a good
>> choice if it weren't twice as expensive as the competition.
>>
>
> I own an original basic Nook, and I'm very satisfied. One of the cool
> things for people that like messing with these things is that the Nook is
> running Android, deep deep down, so I can install custom apps and WPA
> Supplicant configs to get on my University Wifi. I can literally drop PDFs
> and EPUBs (and probably a bunch of other formats I haven't had to use) onto
> the Nook with no external applications and have them detected and available
> for reading.
>
> The Nook simple touch (the new basic one) is also very appealing. I've seen
> it in stores, and it feels a lot more like a paperback.
>
> On the other hand, the Nook Color has Angry Birds. I can't argue with that
> :D
>

Also, the E-Ink Nook is the same price as the Kindle.

Re: TDPL is an Amazon Kindle bestseller

[Andrew Wiley]

On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Charles Hixson  wrote:

> Considering that Amazon has the proven capability of removing a book from
> your Kindle after you've bought it, I don't expect that I'll EVER decide to
> invest in a Kindle.  Some other e-book reader is a possibility.  The Nook
> has certain interesting features, and there's one that would be a good
> choice if it weren't twice as expensive as the competition.
>

I own an original basic Nook, and I'm very satisfied. One of the cool things
for people that like messing with these things is that the Nook is running
Android, deep deep down, so I can install custom apps and WPA Supplicant
configs to get on my University Wifi. I can literally drop PDFs and EPUBs
(and probably a bunch of other formats I haven't had to use) onto the Nook
with no external applications and have them detected and available for
reading.

The Nook simple touch (the new basic one) is also very appealing. I've seen
it in stores, and it feels a lot more like a paperback.

On the other hand, the Nook Color has Angry Birds. I can't argue with that
:D

Re: New web newsreader - requesting participation

[Andrew Wiley]

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Andrej Mitrovic  wrote:

> On 2/1/11, Andrew Wiley  wrote:
> > I'm not sure what you mean. I have my Gmail account subscribed to the
> > mailing lists, and everything seems fine?
>
> When you start a new topic it doesn't show up in Gmail. Well, maybe
> they've fixed that recently? I haven't tried in a while, but it didn't
> work before.
>

The email doesn't show up in the inbox until someone replies. This behavior
makes sense to me, at least, because sent messages go to "Sent Mail" and
don't appear in the inbox until they become conversations between multiple
people.
If that frustrates you, well, it's how email clients work because you want
to separate the ongoing discussions from the send-and-forget messages.

Re: New web newsreader - requesting participation

[Andrew Wiley]

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:

> On 2/1/11, Trass3r  wrote:
> > Speaking of newsgroup web interface, interestingly while the main D site
> > points to this crappy reader:
> >
> http://www.digitalmars.com/pnews/indexing.php?server=news.digitalmars.com&group=digitalmars.D.announce
> > there still is a hidden one which is much better imho:
> >
> http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.announce
> >
>
> That one has horrible bugs. You'll click on a topic, then try to read
> a reply, and it shoots you to some random topic 4+ years ago. Happens
> all the time. I only use it to post to NG since using Gmail directly
> doesn't show up my own posts (this is a known gmail bug).
>

I'm not sure what you mean. I have my Gmail account subscribed to the
mailing lists, and everything seems fine?

Re: Phobos unit testing uncovers a CPU bug

[Andrew Wiley]

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Kagamin  wrote:

> Walter Bright Wrote:
>
> > How do you decide how many bits should be enough for any algorithm?
> >
> > The thing is, the FPU has 53 bits of precision and so ought to be correct
> to the
> > last bit.
>
> It's not me, it's the programmer. He was disgusted that his algorithm
> produced garbage, which means, the error was unacceptable. Mat be it was 1%,
> may be 80%, I don't, that was his decision, that the result was
> unacceptable. The bug description assumes the problem was in the last bit,
> which means, he wanted precision higher than the machine precision.
>

What programmer? What algorithm? As far as I can tell, this was found when
testing a library explicitly for accuracy, not in an application, so your
argument doesn't apply.