There are other ways to do minimalist programming in D without
-betterC. See
https://dlang.org/changelog/2.079.0.html#minimal_runtime
Well, what would be the difference between betterC and writing my
own minimal runtime? For the time being doing betterC looks
preferable, so I don't need to
printf() and exit() are part of the CRT.
Well, yes, but there is implementation for them in msvcrt.dll,
which is installed on all Windows platforms. So I can link to it
and use it for free, without adding the whole CRT to my
executable. Otherwise I could use MessageBox and ExitProcess for
On Tuesday, 14 August 2018 at 13:11:57 UTC, Rel wrote:
Can I or is it even possible to remove the CRT (C's runtime
library) completely from my executables compiled with betterC
flag?
Okey, it seems I figure out how to do it with MinGW linker:
import core.stdc.stdlib;
import
Can I or is it even possible to remove the CRT (C's runtime
library) completely from my executables compiled with betterC
flag?
Feedback is welcome ;-)
The latest DMD installer seems not to be flaged by Kaspersky
Antivirus, thanks!
To be exact as a "HEUR:Trojan-Downloader.Win32.Agent.gen".
Few other AV software does the same:
https://www.virustotal.com/#/file/0aa364c5cb90630a5757aacc0c3c05a2273f5fdb88e14e2b80d4c19ee5b16d10/detection
I think, we should do something about it, at very least report
for false-positive to
On Thursday, 3 May 2018 at 19:11:05 UTC, Mark wrote:
Funnily, none of these languages have a "static if" construct,
nor do Rust, Swift and Nim. Not one that I could find, anyway.
So what's a big deal in having 'static if' construct? Most of the
new programming languages that compiles to native
On Friday, 27 April 2018 at 15:31:37 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
DMD can cross-compile between 32-bit and 64-bit on the same
platform. To targeting a different platform than the host the
code in DMD needs to be reorganized a bit. When compiling the
compiler it will only include support for
So, okey, bare with me here. As I once told here before the only
one thing I love about Golang is the ability to easily
cross-compile code from any supported OS targeting any supported
OS. So I was thinking what actually stops DMD from doing the same
thing? DMD has own backends targeting X86
In case you guys like to take a quick look at new emerging,
but somewhat unknown systems programming languages:
* https://www.red-lang.org/ (own handwritten backend)
* https://crystal-lang.org/ (llvm-based backend)
* https://ziglang.org/ (llvm-based backend)
* http://nitlanguage.org/ (c-based
As for me, I find the Nim programming language interesting.
However I dislike syntax a bit, in some cases Python+Pascal
syntax style of Nim looks very ugly in my opinion. Also I
strongly against relying on C compiler for code generation,
knowing how slow it can be. Obviously it was easy for
On Sunday, 22 April 2018 at 15:56:49 UTC, kinke wrote:
* `-link-internally` able to (cross-)link Windows, Linux and
macOS binaries.
This is nice to hear, but just to make it clear, what steps do I
need to take to for example build a Mac OSX binary on Windows or
Linux? Can I just download libs
On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 at 12:31:35 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
https://wiki.dlang.org/Build_D_for_Android
https://wiki.dlang.org/Building_LDC_runtime_libraries
https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/pull/2142#issuecomment-304472412
As far as I understand I will need a C toolchain that
allows
Well, to be completely honest with you the only one
thing I like about the Go programming language is the
ability to easily cross-compile your Go program from
any supported OS to any supported OS.
So I was wondering what is the story of cross-compilation
for different D language compilers? Is it
On Monday, 8 May 2017 at 14:47:36 UTC, Ethan Watson wrote:
I can answer #1, I know a few things there but that's more
something he should talk about as I don't know how public he's
made that knowledge.
Well, I know that DMD in particular made a trade off not to
collect garbage during the
What do you guys think of the points explained here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWv_vUgbmug
Seems like the language shares a lot of features with
D programming language. However there are several
features that caught my interest:
1) The compile times seems very fast in comparison
with other
On Wednesday, 11 May 2016 at 06:49:51 UTC, Rel wrote:
So... Has anything changed about the -betterC flag lately? It
is now documented as a compiler flag, but there is no
documentation on how to properly use it. Is it considered to be
stable now or it is still a hack? What language features are
So... Has anything changed about the -betterC flag lately? It is
now documented as a compiler flag, but there is no documentation
on how to properly use it. Is it considered to be stable now or
it is still a hack? What language features are forbidden when
using this flag?
On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 14:32:39 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 12:56:48 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 10:51:23 UTC, Rel wrote:
I remember that there was some buzz around undocumented
-betterC compiler flag that should allow
I remember that there was some buzz around undocumented -betterC
compiler flag that should allow people get away from hard
druntime dependencies and write bare metal code, drivers or
kernel modules in some limited D subset. Could you make some
comments about it. Does it exists and is it
20 matches
Mail list logo
