Re: D and SCons

2017-05-03 Thread Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 00:05 +0200, Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > I've come to like SCons for my C++ projects. Way more so than say > CMake. > It would be awesome to have full-fledged support for D there esp. in  > mixed C++ with D setup. I had been using SCons, SConsolidator,

Re: D and SCons

2017-05-03 Thread Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d
On Tue, 2017-05-02 at 15:39 -0700, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > However, I have to confess that I found Russel's D tooling (the last > time I tried it anyway, which was a while back) not quite up to what > I'd > like it to do. As a result, in my recent projects I've resorted > simp

Re: D and SCons

2017-05-02 Thread Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d
On 5/3/17 12:39 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:05:48AM +0200, Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote: On 5/2/17 2:20 PM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: Hi, Prompted by Bill Deegan (*), I have started a SCons wiki page on D support. Even if you do

Re: D and SCons

2017-05-02 Thread H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:05:48AM +0200, Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 5/2/17 2:20 PM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Prompted by Bill Deegan (*), I have started a SCons wiki page on D > > support. Even if you do not actually use SCons for D code, if you

Re: D and SCons

2017-05-02 Thread Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d
t did a quick look on the text. The compiler section and "Some general thoughts" feels a bit copy-pasty. I would also replace "to create the system" with "to create the compiler" or some such. 2. Add new good SCons and D related stuff that puts D (and SCons obvio

D and SCons

2017-05-02 Thread Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d
veracity, or at least verisimilitude. 2. Add new good SCons and D related stuff that puts D (and SCons obviously) in a good light. 3. Think of how to add some icons and images to the text to make the page look less a dry academic treatise. OK, off-by-one error. No error in the URL though. Please go

Re: [Scons-users] D and SCons

2012-09-14 Thread Russel Winder
On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 00:30 +0200, Rob T wrote: > On Friday, 14 September 2012 at 05:51:24 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: > > Issues associated with the SCons code base should be reported > > through > > the Tigris issue tracker: > > http://scons.tigris.org/bug-submission.html > > > > So this is to

Re: [Scons-users] D and SCons

2012-09-14 Thread Rob T
On Friday, 14 September 2012 at 05:51:24 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: Issues associated with the SCons code base should be reported through the Tigris issue tracker: http://scons.tigris.org/bug-submission.html So this is to report any scons problem, including the changes relating to D support

Re: [Scons-users] D and SCons

2012-09-13 Thread Russel Winder
On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 06:51 +0100, Russel Winder wrote: […] > Issues associated with the SCons code base should be reported through > the Tigris issue tracker: http://scons.tigris.org/bug-submission.html And if you could make sure you put D-Lang or some such in the issue title when submitting it

Re: [Scons-users] D and SCons

2012-09-13 Thread Russel Winder
On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 00:39 +0200, Rob T wrote: > On Thursday, 13 September 2012 at 22:36:23 UTC, Rob T wrote: > > I just started using your fork of scons and I appreciate the > > effort. > > > > There are a few issues I will report. > > > https://bitbucket.org/russel/scons_d_tooling/issues > "Th

Re: [Scons-users] D and SCons

2012-09-13 Thread Rob T
On Thursday, 13 September 2012 at 22:36:23 UTC, Rob T wrote: I just started using your fork of scons and I appreciate the effort. There are a few issues I will report. https://bitbucket.org/russel/scons_d_tooling/issues "This repository does not have issue tracking enabled." Is there another

Re: [Scons-users] D and SCons

2012-09-13 Thread Rob T
I just started using your fork of scons and I appreciate the effort. There are a few issues I will report. I definitely would like to see scons build and link both c/c++ objects files together with D, so for that reason alone integration is a good idea imo. Integration is also a good idea for a

Re: [Scons-users] D and SCons

2012-09-08 Thread Russel Winder
On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 09:14 -0700, William Deegan wrote: […] > Are you dropping any existing tools? No. The dmd tool remains but has been revamped significantly. the gdc and ldc tools are additions. Currently they are close to copies of each other. More refactoring is needed to pull out common mat

Re: D and SCons

2012-09-07 Thread "Alex Burton"
On Monday, 3 September 2012 at 07:19:06 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: Hi, Is there anyone out there using SCons to build D code? If so it would be good to get some alpha and beta testers for the evolution of D support in SCons. I appreciate that other build frameworks may be the preferred ones

Re: D and SCons

2012-09-05 Thread Russel Winder
I have a first cut at a second generation D support in SCons. There are separate dmd, gdc and ldc tools all of which appear to work, well they pass the few tests there are just now, there needs to be more. Further the tools are integrated into the SCons defaulting and selection scheme so you should

Re: D and SCons

2012-09-04 Thread Chris Holdsworth
On 04/09/2012 17:01, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:06:56AM +0100, Russel Winder wrote: [...] What is comes down to is whether people testing the evolution of D tooling would be happy to work with a fork of SCons or whether it is necessary to work with a separate package and a dist

Re: D and SCons

2012-09-04 Thread H. S. Teoh
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:06:56AM +0100, Russel Winder wrote: [...] > What is comes down to is whether people testing the evolution of D > tooling would be happy to work with a fork of SCons or whether it is > necessary to work with a separate package and a distributed SCons. [...] I'm OK to use

Re: D and SCons

2012-09-04 Thread Russel Winder
Chris, (and T), > I'm using Scons for a couple of toy D projects. What's the best channel > for feedback/bug reports? Thanks for getting back to me. The reasons for calling for the attention of people using SCons for D building is because I think I need to change the way the D tools are develope

Re: D and SCons

2012-09-03 Thread Chris Holdsworth
On 03/09/2012 08:19, Russel Winder wrote: Hi, Is there anyone out there using SCons to build D code? If so it would be good to get some alpha and beta testers for the evolution of D support in SCons. I appreciate that other build frameworks may be the preferred ones for D, let us not start a "w

Re: D and SCons

2012-09-03 Thread H. S. Teoh
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 08:19:19AM +0100, Russel Winder wrote: > Hi, > > Is there anyone out there using SCons to build D code? I (still) am! > If so it would be good to get some alpha and beta testers for the > evolution of D support in SCons. [...] Currently my D projects aren't very complex

D and SCons

2012-09-03 Thread Russel Winder
Hi, Is there anyone out there using SCons to build D code? If so it would be good to get some alpha and beta testers for the evolution of D support in SCons. I appreciate that other build frameworks may be the preferred ones for D, let us not start a "which build framework is the best" debate, at

Re: D and SCons

2012-01-06 Thread Iain Buclaw
On 6 January 2012 18:05, Sean Kelly wrote: > From an ABI perspective, I know GDC used to not pass the first function > argument in EAX on x32 (ie. the calling convention for extern (C) and extern > (D) were identical).  I imagine this is still true, but one of the GDC folks > would have to say

Re: D and SCons

2012-01-06 Thread Walter Bright
On 1/6/2012 6:29 AM, Russel Winder wrote: I am planning doing a bit more work on the SCons support for D. In terms of strategy the following question arises: Are the object files produced by DMD, GDC and LDC mutually compatible? i.e. can some sources be compiled with DMD, some with GDC, and so

Re: D and SCons

2012-01-06 Thread Brad Roberts
This whole area we have got to fix or .dll/.so support is fairly meaningless. The compilers output need to be interoperable. On 1/6/2012 10:05 AM, Sean Kelly wrote: > From an ABI perspective, I know GDC used to not pass the first function > argument in EAX on x32 (ie. the calling convention for

Re: D and SCons

2012-01-06 Thread Sean Kelly
From an ABI perspective, I know GDC used to not pass the first function argument in EAX on x32 (ie. the calling convention for extern (C) and extern (D) were identical). I imagine this is still true, but one of the GDC folks would have to say for sure. The goal however is certainly to make the

Re: D and SCons

2012-01-06 Thread Russel Winder
On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 09:30 -0800, Sean Kelly wrote: > No. Each has a separate runtime, etc. OK, thanks. I had sort of been hoping that because DMD and GDC can both compile to object code that can be linked with GCC that there might be a hope of interworking. But it seems that the link-time lib

Re: D and SCons

2012-01-06 Thread Sean Kelly
No. Each has a separate runtime, etc. Sent from my iPhone On Jan 6, 2012, at 6:29 AM, Russel Winder wrote: > I am planning doing a bit more work on the SCons support for D. In > terms of strategy the following question arises: Are the object files > produced by DMD, GDC and LDC mutually comp

D and SCons

2012-01-06 Thread Russel Winder
I am planning doing a bit more work on the SCons support for D. In terms of strategy the following question arises: Are the object files produced by DMD, GDC and LDC mutually compatible? i.e. can some sources be compiled with DMD, some with GDC, and some with LDC and all the object files linked