Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright Wrote: Pablo Ripolles wrote: Can we expect this to work on Mac OS X version 10.5 still? Yes. All right! however in MacOSX 1.5 I've observed the following which doesn't happens in linux: I have a module named file.d and I have a main program named main.d. The module is being imported and it's functions used in the main program. I compile file.d and main.d separately (no linking). For the linking I do this: dmd file.o main.o -ofmain No problem in link time, however in run time it prompts Bus error. It doesn't happen when I do: dmd main.o file.o -ofmain Is this expected for the OSX in general or only 10.5?
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright Wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Can we expect this to work on Mac OS X version 10.5 still? Thanks!
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Pablo Ripolles wrote: Can we expect this to work on Mac OS X version 10.5 still? Yes.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
digited Wrote: Walter Bright Wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Thanks again for small commits to svn! Today i've built DMD1 on Mac 10.5 (Intel) just like this: svn co http://svn.dsource.org/projects/dmd/branches/dmd-1.x/src dmd cd dmd make -f osx.mak and it's a godsand - no more downloading 8 MB of unusable stuff (and obsolete because some patches are already in trunk). I'm surprised that isn't fixed yet. http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2908 btw, i had to change #include ../mars/mars.h to #include ../mars.h in backend/dwarf.c and backend/machobj.c to compile it.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Michael P., el 23 de octubre a las 15:36 me escribiste: digited Wrote: Walter Bright Wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Thanks again for small commits to svn! Today i've built DMD1 on Mac 10.5 (Intel) just like this: svn co http://svn.dsource.org/projects/dmd/branches/dmd-1.x/src dmd cd dmd make -f osx.mak and it's a godsand - no more downloading 8 MB of unusable stuff (and obsolete because some patches are already in trunk). I'm surprised that isn't fixed yet. http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2908 My guess is that Walter have some mars directory in his development environment so everything works well for him. -- Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/ -- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) -- Es mejor probar el sabor de sapo y darse cuenta que es feo, antes que no hacerlo y creer que es una gran gomita de pera. -- Dr Ricardo Vaporesso, Malta 1951
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
On 2009-10-16 15:31:15 +0200, rmcguire rjmcgu...@gmail.com said: Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote: digited wrote: So you don't mind that Tango is still uncompilable with 1.050 because of hurrying, I didn't know that. The bugzilla number which was posted as the reason it wouldn't compile was fixed. Hi Walter, could you not just put rc1, rc2, etc... at the end of the file names when you upload to server. This way we could tell if the release has been tested by the community, and you wouldn't have to change your release process much? Unless of course if it is all automated. -Rory Well I am not sure that it is really worth making a full release branching, just a tag and telling people that should become a release, and giving binaries to test it would probably be enough normally at least for D 1.0 where there shouldn't be large changes. I suppose that opening the development more brought in more peoples that don't write as defensively as W (or modifications of larger parts) and so more testing is probably good. In this specific case we were also probably a little bit sloppy at reporting problems, so that the went unnoticed for a couple of releases. I suppose that W wanted to fix regressions ASAP, which in general is good I think, just this time it played out a little badly. Anyway if W is willing a more formal release procedure would be good, but not absolutely necessary
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
zsxxsz zhengshu...@hexun.com wrote: == Quote from digited (digi...@yandex.ru)'s article Walter Bright Wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Thank you for this release, and thank you for small commits to SVN! The only thing that is missing from a good release procedure is _release_candidates_. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases! With DMD in SVN, it will be totally ok to do releases by one in 1-2 months, the main problem is that the developers don't have any time to actually test the new release. The bugs are found, but it's too late and they need to wait for new release, with new _features_ and thus, with _sudded_ release, new bugs and breaking changes (even in D1, yes). You can totally eliminate this kind of problems with posting not a Here's a new complete release! Now you can test it, but you won't get any fixes until next one, but a _release_candidate_, make an SVN branch for it and let developers (of QtD, Tango and lots of other projects) to test the candidate and report bugs to you. Be sure, after a week of testing, while you can work on next release and new features in trunk, the release branch will really become ready for a _stable_ release, when noone will have to complain about blocker bugs. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases, make release candidates and wait for bug reports, apply fixes to the release branch and then make a really good release, no matter not so often! Thank you. I don't think so. If there are some important bugs fixed, the new release is necessary without caring about the release date. With dmd.2.034, I don't event compile druntime. This wouldn't have happened if there was release candidates.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote: digited wrote: So you don't mind that Tango is still uncompilable with 1.050 because of hurrying, I didn't know that. The bugzilla number which was posted as the reason it wouldn't compile was fixed. Hi Walter, could you not just put rc1, rc2, etc... at the end of the file names when you upload to server. This way we could tell if the release has been tested by the community, and you wouldn't have to change your release process much? Unless of course if it is all automated. -Rory
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
Using DMD 2.035 I have tried to compile:
void main() {}
Using:
dmd -X temp.d
And the compiler crashes.
Sorry, that happens if the source file doesn't have a module statement.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
MIURA Masahiro wrote: I have built QtD r304 (latest) with DMD 2.050, Of course that's 2.035. I'm screwed by rapid releases :-) (I do welcome rapid releases, though)
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright Wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Thank you for this release, and thank you for small commits to SVN! The only thing that is missing from a good release procedure is _release_candidates_. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases! With DMD in SVN, it will be totally ok to do releases by one in 1-2 months, the main problem is that the developers don't have any time to actually test the new release. The bugs are found, but it's too late and they need to wait for new release, with new _features_ and thus, with _sudded_ release, new bugs and breaking changes (even in D1, yes). You can totally eliminate this kind of problems with posting not a Here's a new complete release! Now you can test it, but you won't get any fixes until next one, but a _release_candidate_, make an SVN branch for it and let developers (of QtD, Tango and lots of other projects) to test the candidate and report bugs to you. Be sure, after a week of testing, while you can work on next release and new features in trunk, the release branch will really become ready for a _stable_ release, when noone will have to complain about blocker bugs. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases, make release candidates and wait for bug reports, apply fixes to the release branch and then make a really good release, no matter not so often! Thank you.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
digited Wrote: Walter Bright Wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Thank you for this release, and thank you for small commits to SVN! The only thing that is missing from a good release procedure is _release_candidates_. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases! With DMD in SVN, it will be totally ok to do releases by one in 1-2 months, the main problem is that the developers don't have any time to actually test the new release. The bugs are found, but it's too late and they need to wait for new release, with new _features_ and thus, with _sudded_ release, new bugs and breaking changes (even in D1, yes). You can totally eliminate this kind of problems with posting not a Here's a new complete release! Now you can test it, but you won't get any fixes until next one, but a _release_candidate_, make an SVN branch for it and let developers (of QtD, Tango and lots of other projects) to test the candidate and report bugs to you. Be sure, after a week of testing, while you can work on next release and new features in trunk, the release branch will really become ready for a _stable_ release, when noone will have to complain about blocker bugs. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases, make release candidates and wait for bug reports, apply fixes to the release branch and then make a really good release, no matter not so often! Thank you. Yeah I totally agree here. This release was intended to fix Tango, but there are 2 more regressions that are not fixed: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3397 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3401
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
== Quote from digited (digi...@yandex.ru)'s article Walter Bright Wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Thank you for this release, and thank you for small commits to SVN! The only thing that is missing from a good release procedure is _release_candidates_. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases! With DMD in SVN, it will be totally ok to do releases by one in 1-2 months, the main problem is that the developers don't have any time to actually test the new release. The bugs are found, but it's too late and they need to wait for new release, with new _features_ and thus, with _sudded_ release, new bugs and breaking changes (even in D1, yes). You can totally eliminate this kind of problems with posting not a Here's a new complete release! Now you can test it, but you won't get any fixes until next one, but a _release_candidate_, make an SVN branch for it and let developers (of QtD, Tango and lots of other projects) to test the candidate and report bugs to you. Be sure, after a week of testing, while you can work on next release and new features in trunk, the release branch will really become ready for a _stable_ release, when noone will have to complain about blocker bugs. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases, make release candidates and wait for bug reports, apply fixes to the release branch and then make a really good release, no matter not so often! Thank you. I don't think so. If there are some important bugs fixed, the new release is necessary without caring about the release date. With dmd.2.034, I don't event compile druntime.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Eldar Insafutdinov wrote: digited Wrote: Walter Bright Wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Thank you for this release, and thank you for small commits to SVN! The only thing that is missing from a good release procedure is _release_candidates_. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases! With DMD in SVN, it will be totally ok to do releases by one in 1-2 months, the main problem is that the developers don't have any time to actually test the new release. The bugs are found, but it's too late and they need to wait for new release, with new _features_ and thus, with _sudded_ release, new bugs and breaking changes (even in D1, yes). You can totally eliminate this kind of problems with posting not a Here's a new complete release! Now you can test it, but you won't get any fixes until next one, but a _release_candidate_, make an SVN branch for it and let developers (of QtD, Tango and lots of other projects) to test the candidate and report bugs to you. Be sure, after a week of testing, while you can work on next release and new features in trunk, the release branch will really become ready for a _stable_ release, when noone will have to complain about blocker bugs. Please, Walter, do not hurry with releases, make release candidates and wait for bug reports, apply fixes to the release branch and then make a really good release, no matter not so often! Thank you. Yeah I totally agree here. This release was intended to fix Tango, but there are 2 more regressions that are not fixed: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3397 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3401 PLEASE, when these things are reported, mark them as severity = regression. Even reading the bug report there's no indication that they are regressions. Saying it is a blocker for Tango is NOT the same.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
zsxxsz Wrote: I don't think so. If there are some important bugs fixed, the new release is necessary without caring about the release date. With dmd.2.034, I don't event compile druntime. So you don't mind that Tango is still uncompilable with 1.050 because of hurrying, for third release in a row? There must be an easy compiling of DMD from source, and you can get your own version from SVN trunk with a fresh bugfix you need. But a release must generally be stable and should not break the code of main D projects (or give them time to change the projects' code and fix DMD bugs), there's a point in nighly builds, but not weekly releases that keep breaking the code.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright wrote:
The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were
blocking QtD and Tango.
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip
Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update.
The json output looks cool. :)
But for this:
---
module main;
alias int myInt;
myInt x;
---
I get:
---
{
name : main,
kind : module,
file : main.d,
members : [
{
name : myInt,
kind : alias,
type : int,
line : 5}
,{
name : x,
kind : variable,
type : int,
line : 7}
]
}
---
So you see, variable's type is int, not myInt. I knew this was going
to happen because the way dmd is implemented and how it fogets about
aliases of types (it just resolves them and forgets about the original
alias name). I had some head-aches remembering those things in Descent. :-P
Think of binding libraries like OpenGL, DirectX, even the windows API
where all functions receive and return aliases. If an IDE shows the
resolved aliases it's no use to the user, that's what aliases are for.
Should I create an enhancement for this?
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
digited wrote: So you don't mind that Tango is still uncompilable with 1.050 because of hurrying, I didn't know that. The bugzilla number which was posted as the reason it wouldn't compile was fixed.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Ary Borenszweig wrote: Should I create an enhancement for this? Might as well.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright Wrote: digited wrote: So you don't mind that Tango is still uncompilable with 1.050 because of hurrying, I didn't know that. The bugzilla number which was posted as the reason it wouldn't compile was fixed. I don't try to accuse you on anything, just ask to give the users some time to test a release candidate - that will show existing blockers better than posting scanning bugzilla before sudden release, devs will fix their bugs and you'll get a feedback for fixes, and there (i hope) won't be critical problems in compiling existing projects after release. If you are already sending rc's to Tango devs, you simply can make them public and make an SVN branch with their code.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:46:25 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Hi Walter, Thanks for the commits to svn for us to testing! But the release came in a bit of a hurry. I reported two more regressions, thought there weren't marked as those because, well, I forgot to check all options.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright wrote: Bugzilla 1534: Can't mix in a case statement. Woo hoo!
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright, el 14 de octubre a las 20:46 me escribiste: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Thanks for the first releases with full svn history! 8-) -- Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/ -- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) -- Wake from your sleep, the drying of your tears, Today we escape, we escape.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright wrote: The main purpose of this is to correct a couple of regressions that were blocking QtD and Tango. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.050.zip http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.035.zip Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update. Sweet, JSON output, looks like it wasn't very hard to write :)
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Jeremie Pelletier wrote: Sweet, JSON output, looks like it wasn't very hard to write :) It was rather trivial. But it's a bit primitive right now. The problem is I'm not writing a consumer of this data, so I'm not sure what it should contain. Consider it as a trial balloon. I'm interested in hearing from those who are making plugins to Vim, Emacs, source code browsers, etc., who can use this, and what more is needed. I don't want to just throw in a grab-bag of cruft.
Re: dmd 1.050 and 2.035 release
Walter Bright:
Using DMD 2.035 I have tried to compile:
void main() {}
Using:
dmd -X temp.d
And the compiler crashes.
Regarding the -X name, isn't something like -json better? Or better to
unify the switch for json output and normal ddoc output in some way.
Even better, DMD2 compilation switches may need a bit of global
clean-up/rationalization (and they must be chosen taking in account the needs
and constraints of the LDC compiler too, so both compilers can share all or
most the same switches, simplifying the change of compiler a bit).
Bye,
bearophile
