On Sat, 06 Dec 2014 01:34:20 +0300
Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> 05-Dec-2014 04:47, Daniel Murphy пишет:
> > "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" wrote in message
> > news:mailman.2688.1417735514.9932.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
> >
> >> > >
> >> > >What would you suggest we do?
> >>
On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 01:34:20AM +0300, Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> 05-Dec-2014 04:47, Daniel Murphy пишет:
> >"H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" wrote in message
> >news:mailman.2688.1417735514.9932.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
> >
> >>> >
> >>> >What would you suggest we do?
> >
05-Dec-2014 04:47, Daniel Murphy пишет:
"H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" wrote in message
news:mailman.2688.1417735514.9932.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
> >
> >What would you suggest we do?
>
> Write a build script in D?
+1.
I mean, a D compiler is an additional dependency, but it's one we'
05-Dec-2014 03:02, Trent Forkert пишет:
On Thursday, 4 December 2014 at 19:52:12 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
04-Dec-2014 18:32, Dicebot пишет:
Please no additional 3d-party dependencies for D core tool stack.
What are current 3rd-party deps? Dependency on DMC make and compiler
is already the
On Friday, 5 December 2014 at 17:47:10 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
"Dicebot" wrote in message
news:jrymzqkdctmfsgrqz...@forum.dlang.org...
How is it really different? Both require external tool, both
are available via prebuilt windows binary. At least you can
build GNU one yourself.
Because
"uri" wrote in message news:glxybpnqadqnfnixk...@forum.dlang.org...
I think I'd much rather GNU make.
No offence, but there's no chance your little tool will ever get the same
test coverage or real-world use testing of GNU make on Windows.
This is why I prefer CMake like tools over dub. Plu
"Dicebot" wrote in message news:jrymzqkdctmfsgrqz...@forum.dlang.org...
How is it really different? Both require external tool, both are
available via prebuilt windows binary. At least you can build GNU
one yourself.
Because I already have to install dmc and dm make comes with that.
On Friday, 5 December 2014 at 10:48:15 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
"Dicebot" wrote in message
news:kgogertqxpmczhoqr...@forum.dlang.org...
That or just clean up the existing makefiles (getting rid of
DMC make and using GNU make on all platforms would be ideal).
Or just doing nothing - while ex
On Friday, 5 December 2014 at 10:48:15 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
As much as I dislike digital mars make, requiring GNU make on
windows would be worse. One of these days I'm going to rewrite
the dmd test suite to not require make at all, but I'm going to
have to figure out how it works first.
"Dicebot" wrote in message news:kgogertqxpmczhoqr...@forum.dlang.org...
That or just clean up the existing makefiles (getting rid of DMC make and
using GNU make on all platforms would be ideal). Or just doing nothing -
while existing build system is quite a mess, the problem is not critical
e
On Thursday, 4 December 2014 at 23:19:21 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
"Dmitry Olshansky" wrote in message
news:m5qe1c$218a$1...@digitalmars.com...
04-Dec-2014 18:32, Dicebot пишет:
> Please no additional 3d-party dependencies for D core tool
> stack.
What are current 3rd-party deps? Dependenc
On Fri, 5 Dec 2014 12:47:45 +1100
Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" wrote in message
> news:mailman.2688.1417735514.9932.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
>
> > > >
> > > >What would you suggest we do?
> > >
> > > Write a build script in D?
> >
> > +1.
>
> I
"H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" wrote in message
news:mailman.2688.1417735514.9932.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
> >
> >What would you suggest we do?
>
> Write a build script in D?
+1.
I mean, a D compiler is an additional dependency, but it's one we're already
planning to add for dmd.
On Thursday, 4 December 2014 at 19:52:12 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
wrote:
04-Dec-2014 18:32, Dicebot пишет:
Please no additional 3d-party dependencies for D core tool
stack.
What are current 3rd-party deps? Dependency on DMC make and
compiler is already there, GNU make is not installed by default
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 10:19:40AM +1100, Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> "Dmitry Olshansky" wrote in message news:m5qe1c$218a$1...@digitalmars.com...
>
> >04-Dec-2014 18:32, Dicebot пишет:
> >> Please no additional 3d-party dependencies for D core tool stack.
> >
> >What are current 3rd
"Dmitry Olshansky" wrote in message news:m5qe1c$218a$1...@digitalmars.com...
04-Dec-2014 18:32, Dicebot пишет:
> Please no additional 3d-party dependencies for D core tool stack.
What are current 3rd-party deps? Dependency on DMC make and compiler is
already there, GNU make is not installed b
04-Dec-2014 18:32, Dicebot пишет:
Please no additional 3d-party dependencies for D core tool stack.
What are current 3rd-party deps? Dependency on DMC make and compiler is
already there, GNU make is not installed by default on FreeBSD.
What would you suggest we do?
--
Dmitry Olshansky
Please no additional 3d-party dependencies for D core tool stack.
On 12/03/2014 09:31 PM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
Yep, this is so because all unit tests live in a shared library.
Mmm. Why pack unittests into a shared library?
Well to test phobos as shared library, which is still supposed to become
the default at some point.
So we need a special test ru
01-Dec-2014 16:59, Martin Nowak пишет:
On Thursday, 27 November 2014 at 20:17:55 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
What I know(?) so far:
1. First we build library in one go - trivial to reproduce.
2. Then we compile each unittest with -c and -deps to dump actual
dependencies.
Yes, we compile one o
On Thursday, 27 November 2014 at 21:41:41 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:30:49PM +0200, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 23:17:34 +0300
Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> Okay, so I'm prepping up a SCons build of Phobos. It com
On Thursday, 27 November 2014 at 20:17:55 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
wrote:
What I know(?) so far:
1. First we build library in one go - trivial to reproduce.
2. Then we compile each unittest with -c and -deps to dump
actual dependencies.
Yes, we compile one object file per module because memory do
On Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:24:45 +0300
Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> python to exe tools.
WINE? oh, noes! ;-)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
28-Nov-2014 00:39, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d пишет:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:30:49PM +0200, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 23:17:34 +0300
Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Okay, so I'm prepping up a SCons build of Phobos. It comes along
rather nicely, I've re
28-Nov-2014 11:51, Dejan Lekic пишет:
I never liked SCons for some reason. I prefer CMake over it. Waf is IMHO
better than SCons too. Maybe it is more fair to compare SCons and Waf as
they both are Python-based.
Anyhow, use whatever works for you. :)
Well we could always use CMake that is if s
28-Nov-2014 01:07, ketmar via Digitalmars-d пишет:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 13:39:37 -0800
"H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" wrote:
makefiles can then be shipped as part of the source distribution, but
they need not (and probably should not!) be in the git tree.
hope this will not happen soon. i used
On Friday, 28 November 2014 at 08:45:30 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
There's usually no problems with Python on Posix, but on
Windows, I really don't want that. I really like that DMD has
so few dependencies.
Same here. I prefer the current situation where we build DMD and
runtime using Make.
I never liked SCons for some reason. I prefer CMake over it. Waf
is IMHO better than SCons too. Maybe it is more fair to compare
SCons and Waf as they both are Python-based.
Anyhow, use whatever works for you. :)
On 2014-11-27 23:07, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
hope this will not happen soon. i used to build DMD from git head, but i
don't want to install python for that. ;-)
There's usually no problems with Python on Posix, but on Windows, I
really don't want that. I really like that DMD has so fe
"H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" wrote in message
news:mailman.2384.1417124501.9932.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
> does this mean that 'make' will be eventually dropped? oh, noes...
One idea I had, which is easily done in SCons, is to auto-generate
makefiles for each platform. On the dev box,
On 11/28/2014 6:39 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
One idea I had, which is easily done in SCons, is to auto-generate
makefiles for each platform. On the dev box, run scons with a particular
virtual target, say `scons genmake` or something like that, and it will
iterate over each support
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 13:39:37 -0800
"H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" wrote:
> makefiles can then be shipped as part of the source distribution, but
> they need not (and probably should not!) be in the git tree.
hope this will not happen soon. i used to build DMD from git head, but i
don't want to in
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:30:49PM +0200, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 23:17:34 +0300
> Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
> > Okay, so I'm prepping up a SCons build of Phobos. It comes along
> > rather nicely, I've replicated most of posix.mak paraphernalia in
>
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 23:17:34 +0300
Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Okay, so I'm prepping up a SCons build of Phobos. It comes along rather
> nicely, I've replicated most of posix.mak paraphernalia in ~150 LOC that
> does work for both Windows and Linux, the rest of POSIX to follow s
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:17:34PM +0300, Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> Okay, so I'm prepping up a SCons build of Phobos.
Hooray!
> It comes along rather nicely, I've replicated most of posix.mak
> paraphernalia in ~150 LOC that does work for both Windows and Linux,
> the rest of
Okay, so I'm prepping up a SCons build of Phobos. It comes along rather
nicely, I've replicated most of posix.mak paraphernalia in ~150 LOC that
does work for both Windows and Linux, the rest of POSIX to follow shortly.
Some make targets are trivial to translate (ddocs, zips etc.) but
unittest
36 matches
Mail list logo
