On 2013-06-06 10:38, Don wrote:
This is great news!
There's an often-repeated error in there. Borland cannot possibly have
patented Structured Exception Handling -- it was invented by Microsoft,
not by Borland. Of course anybody can claim a patent *related* to SEH,
or that uses SEH in some way,
Am 06.06.2013 01:45, schrieb David Nadlinger:
Hi all,
As some of you might already know, LDC has come dangerously close to
being usable on Win32/MinGW recently.
I just posted a small writeup describing the current situation to my
blog: http://klickverbot.at/blog/2013/05/the-state-of-ldc-on
/the-state-of-ldc-on-windows/
Alpha-quality binary packages are available as part of 0.11.0
Beta 3:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.871.1370475122.13711.digitalmars-d-...@puremagic.com
David
This is great news!
There's an often-repeated error in there. Borland cannot possibly
Am Thu, 06 Jun 2013 03:47:58 +0200
schrieb "bearophile" :
> When I want optimizations with this ldc I have used "-release
> -profile-verifier-noassert -O5". Is this good enough?
> I don't know why ldc2 doesn't have "-noboundscheck".
As fas as I know O4/O5 is currently not implemented and
often p
I have seen this code is about 6 times faster compiled with
ldc2 compared to dmd:
I run it with 1 command line argument.
Bye,
bearophile
David Nadlinger:
Alpha-quality binary packages are available as part of 0.11.0
Beta 3:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.871.1370475122.13711.digitalmars-d-...@puremagic.com
I have done few small tests:
With no optimization dmd compiles about twice faster (or more)
than ldc2.
When I wan
David Nadlinger:
Whoops, I absentmindedly updated the time stamp, without
noticing that it actually caused the month to change. Should be
fixed now.
The page works now.
I'll try this LDC2.
For Windows I suggest to distribute a single 7zip that contains
both ldc and the needed gcc libs (poss
On Thursday, 6 June 2013 at 00:05:03 UTC, bearophile wrote:
It gives me a "page not found"
Whoops, I absentmindedly updated the time stamp, without noticing
that it actually caused the month to change. Should be fixed now.
David
David Nadlinger:
I just posted a small writeup describing the current situation
to my blog:
http://klickverbot.at/blog/2013/05/the-state-of-ldc-on-windows/
It gives me a "page not found"
Bye,
bearophile
Hi all,
As some of you might already know, LDC has come dangerously close
to being usable on Win32/MinGW recently.
I just posted a small writeup describing the current situation to
my blog:
http://klickverbot.at/blog/2013/05/the-state-of-ldc-on-windows/
Alpha-quality binary packages are
On 2011-11-12 11:29:51 +, Jonas Drewsen said:
dlang.org actually contains a copy of d-p-l.org. Maybe the owner of
dlang.org is willing to let digitalmars take over that domain and make
it the official domain. That would be much better that d-p-l.org I
think.
Wow! I didn't know. that's go
On 11/13/2011 10:58 AM, bioinfornatics wrote:
Maybe i have miss understood .
you want build a lib as 32 binary so for this before you need have
phobos and druntime as 32 bits. for build a library as 32 bits with ldc2
build as 64 you need you flag -m32.
by default:
- ldc2 64 do like -m64
- ldc
Le dimanche 13 novembre 2011 à 09:35 -0500, dsimcha a écrit :
> On 11/13/2011 8:14 AM, bioinfornatics wrote:
> > Le dimanche 13 novembre 2011 à 13:47 +0100, bioinfornatics a écrit :
> >> -DD_FLAGS="-g;-w;-d;-m32"
> >
> > $ CFLAGS="${CFLAGS: -o -g -m32}"
> > $ cmake -DD_FLAGS="-g;-w;-d;-m32" .
> >
>
On 11/13/2011 8:14 AM, bioinfornatics wrote:
Le dimanche 13 novembre 2011 à 13:47 +0100, bioinfornatics a écrit :
-DD_FLAGS="-g;-w;-d;-m32"
$ CFLAGS="${CFLAGS: -o -g -m32}"
$ cmake -DD_FLAGS="-g;-w;-d;-m32" .
it works ?
Wouldn't that just cause the libs to be built as 32-bit only? I want
Le dimanche 13 novembre 2011 à 13:47 +0100, bioinfornatics a écrit :
> -DD_FLAGS="-g;-w;-d;-m32"
$ CFLAGS="${CFLAGS: -o -g -m32}"
$ cmake -DD_FLAGS="-g;-w;-d;-m32" .
it works ?
Le samedi 12 novembre 2011 à 10:24 -0500, dsimcha a écrit :
> On 11/11/2011 1:32 PM, bioinfornatics wrote:
> > did you have a conf file here: /etc/ldc2.conf
> > if yes could you try this:
> > # mv /etc/ldc2.conf /etc/ldc2.conf.back
> > # mv /etc/ldc2.rebuild.conf /etc/ldc2.rebuild.conf.back
> > and
On 11/11/2011 1:32 PM, bioinfornatics wrote:
did you have a conf file here: /etc/ldc2.conf
if yes could you try this:
# mv /etc/ldc2.conf /etc/ldc2.conf.back
# mv /etc/ldc2.rebuild.conf /etc/ldc2.rebuild.conf.back
and run make
$ make
read this please https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/wiki/In
Den 11-11-2011 23:51, Ruslan Mullakhmetov skrev:
On 2011-11-12 00:06:27 +0400, David Nadlinger said:
When we started the move to GitHub, I tried to create an »ldc« org,
but it was already taken. The best alternative we could come up with
on IRC was ldc-developers, which we then decided to use.
On 2011-11-12 00:06:27 +0400, David Nadlinger said:
When we started the move to GitHub, I tried to create an »ldc« org, but
it was already taken. The best alternative we could come up with on IRC
was ldc-developers, which we then decided to use.
Regarding d-programming-ldc, I am not much sure
On 11-11-2011 21:06, David Nadlinger wrote:
[I can only speak for myself as a contributor to LDC, other devs might
have other opinions]
On 11/11/11 7:31 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/11/2011 5:43 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-11-2011 14:35, dsimcha wrote:
This needs to be publicized s
[I can only speak for myself as a contributor to LDC, other devs might
have other opinions]
On 11/11/11 7:31 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/11/2011 5:43 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-11-2011 14:35, dsimcha wrote:
This needs to be publicized somewhere. This whole time I thought LDC was
== Quote from bioinfornatics (bioinfornat...@fedoraproject.rog)'s article
> did you have a conf file here: /etc/ldc2.conf
> if yes could you try this:
> # mv /etc/ldc2.conf /etc/ldc2.conf.back
> # mv /etc/ldc2.rebuild.conf /etc/ldc2.rebuild.conf.back
> and run make
> $ make
> read this please https
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen
wrote:
> On 11-11-2011 19:31, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> On 11/11/2011 5:43 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>>
>>> On 11-11-2011 14:35, dsimcha wrote:
>>>
On 11/11/2011 3:57 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 11-11-2011 08:22, Jude
On 11-11-2011 19:31, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/11/2011 5:43 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-11-2011 14:35, dsimcha wrote:
On 11/11/2011 3:57 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-11-2011 08:22, Jude Young wrote:
On Fri 11 Nov 2011 01:13:32 AM CST, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Is the LDC projec
On 11/11/2011 5:43 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-11-2011 14:35, dsimcha wrote:
On 11/11/2011 3:57 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-11-2011 08:22, Jude Young wrote:
On Fri 11 Nov 2011 01:13:32 AM CST, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Is the LDC project dead? the last update I found is from 201
Le vendredi 11 novembre 2011 à 18:16 +0100, David Nadlinger a écrit :
> On 11/11/11 6:00 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> > Excellent, though if it works reasonably well with Linux-64 the wiki should
> > reflect this. I thought I'd give it a try for some stuff that is extremely
> > performance critical and re
On 11/11/11 6:00 PM, dsimcha wrote:
Excellent, though if it works reasonably well with Linux-64 the wiki should
reflect this. I thought I'd give it a try for some stuff that is extremely
performance critical and requires good optimization. I followed the
instructions
at https://github.com/ldc-
bioinfornatics has recently been trying to improve the build scripts. I
guess something went wrong there.
== Quote from Trass3r (u...@known.com)'s article
> > Is D2 support on Linux 64 far enough along yet that it would be helpful
> > to put it through the paces and file some bug reports?
> It compiles my stuff flawlessly. Also it's the only option to get LTO atm
> ;)
Excellent, though if it works rea
Is D2 support on Linux 64 far enough along yet that it would be helpful
to put it through the paces and file some bug reports?
It compiles my stuff flawlessly. Also it's the only option to get LTO atm
;)
On 11-11-2011 14:35, dsimcha wrote:
On 11/11/2011 3:57 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-11-2011 08:22, Jude Young wrote:
On Fri 11 Nov 2011 01:13:32 AM CST, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Is the LDC project dead? the last update I found is from 2010.
Thanks to Trass3r via stackoverflow.
https://
On 11/11/2011 6:37 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
Let me use this opportunity to ask for help in this regard: If you want
to help the LDC project, no matter whether you are experienced with
compiler hacking or not, currently one of the best ways would be to
start/continue migrating all the (Wiki, …)
On 11/11/2011 3:57 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-11-2011 08:22, Jude Young wrote:
On Fri 11 Nov 2011 01:13:32 AM CST, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Is the LDC project dead? the last update I found is from 2010.
Thanks to Trass3r via stackoverflow.
https://bitbucket.org/lindquist/ldc/changeset
On 11/11/11 8:22 AM, Jude Young wrote:
https://bitbucket.org/lindquist/ldc/changesets
Looks like there are some commits a few months back.
LDC moved to GitHub (https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc, DMD 2.056
and LLVM 3.0 support are being worked on by Alexey in branches).
Unfortunately, shor
On 11-11-2011 08:22, Jude Young wrote:
On Fri 11 Nov 2011 01:13:32 AM CST, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Is the LDC project dead? the last update I found is from 2010.
Thanks to Trass3r via stackoverflow.
https://bitbucket.org/lindquist/ldc/changesets
Looks like there are some commits a few months ba
On Fri 11 Nov 2011 01:13:32 AM CST, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
> Is the LDC project dead? the last update I found is from 2010.
Thanks to Trass3r via stackoverflow.
https://bitbucket.org/lindquist/ldc/changesets
Looks like there are some commits a few months back.
It might have died in the meantime t
Is the LDC project dead? the last update I found is from 2010.
--
Kind Regards
Benjamin Thaut
37 matches
Mail list logo
