On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 11:07 PM, Daniel Keep
wrote:
>
> I don't think this is sufficient. What we really need is to treat each
> part of the version as a complex number.
>
> In this way, non-stable releases can have imaginary components to
> distinguish them from release versions.
>
> So the cur
bearophile wrote:
> Leandro Lucarella:
>
>> I think this is another problem with D, version naming is really confusing
>> and lame. You can't know anything from a D version number.<
>
> Yes, improving such small things is positive.
> So I suggest to start using a "language.version.releaseStatu
Walter Bright:
>As far as I can tell, nobody cared about array ops.<
>So that leaves contract inheritance. I find it hard to see how not having it
>is a showstopper for using D1. Contracts in D haven't been the big win I
>thought they might be at first. They aren't use much at all. There are a
Leandro Lucarella:
>I think this is another problem with D, version naming is really confusing and
>lame. You can't know anything from a D version number.<
Yes, improving such small things is positive.
So I suggest to start using a "language.version.releaseStatus" numbering scheme
for D2 (and m
BCS wrote:
> Hello Georg,
>
>> Well (still resisting opening Pandora's box), I see Public Domain
>> as a superset of any of the OSS &co licenses. Oper source simply means
>> (to me, anyway), free to use anyway you want, including selling and
>> incorporating into other people's apps.
>>
>> So,
Hello Georg,
Well (still resisting opening Pandora's box), I see Public Domain
as a superset of any of the OSS &co licenses. Oper source simply means
(to me, anyway), free to use anyway you want, including selling and
incorporating into other people's apps.
So, licencing somethign as Public
Christopher Wright wrote:
Georg Wrede wrote:
Knowing what (*seriously excuse* the wording here) fascists the FSF
guys are, they obviously assume similar behavior of any opposition.
That explains why they appear paranoid and unreasonable in their
demands of the copyright statements for any code
Georg Wrede wrote:
Knowing what (*seriously excuse* the wording here) fascists the FSF guys
are, they obviously assume similar behavior of any opposition. That
explains why they appear paranoid and unreasonable in their demands of
the copyright statements for any code even remotely considered f
Walter Bright wrote:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Now the only think to do is wait until Mihail Zenkov answer my mail (no
news for now =( ).
If he doesn't, just recode the patch and submit it. There doesn't look
like there's much to it. My understanding from the FSF is the only
concern is with p
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Now the only think to do is wait until Mihail Zenkov answer my mail (no
news for now =( ).
If he doesn't, just recode the patch and submit it. There doesn't look
like there's much to it. My understanding from the FSF is the only
concern is with patches that are more t
Walter Bright, el 12 de mayo a las 10:18 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >Yes, yes, yes, I get the point. I meant Phobos...
>
> Which is (std.demangle) explicitly public domain. If FSF has a problem with
> public domain submissions, please let me know. (The FSF can change one byte
>
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Yes, yes, yes, I get the point. I meant Phobos...
Which is (std.demangle) explicitly public domain. If FSF has a problem
with public domain submissions, please let me know. (The FSF can change
one byte of it and copyright the "derived work" however way they please,
a
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Frits van Bommel (fvbom...@remwovexcapss.nl)'s article
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Isn't the demangle code taken from DMDFE?
Why would DMDFE need a demangler? It can just not mangle in the first place :).
You need name mangling for templates and function overloading
Frits van Bommel, el 12 de mayo a las 16:28 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >Isn't the demangle code taken from DMDFE?
>
> Why would DMDFE need a demangler? It can just not mangle in the first
> place :).
Yes, yes, yes, I get the point. I meant Phobos...
¬¬
--
Leandro Lucarella (lu
== Quote from Frits van Bommel (fvbom...@remwovexcapss.nl)'s article
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> > Isn't the demangle code taken from DMDFE?
> Why would DMDFE need a demangler? It can just not mangle in the first place
> :).
You need name mangling for templates and function overloading to work.
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Isn't the demangle code taken from DMDFE?
Why would DMDFE need a demangler? It can just not mangle in the first place :).
Walter Bright wrote:
> Ameer Armaly wrote:
>> I see. What about the actual "standard library bits" for common tasks
>> like file I/O, strings, date and time, filesystem manipulation, etc.
>> My main gripe is having two regularly accepted libraries that do the
>> same extremely common functions; it
"Walter Bright" wrote in message
news:guakkp$285...@digitalmars.com...
> Ameer Armaly wrote:
>> I see. What about the actual "standard library bits" for common tasks
>> like file I/O, strings, date and time, filesystem manipulation, etc. My
>> main gripe is having two regularly accepted librar
Ameer Armaly wrote:
I see. What about the actual "standard library bits" for common tasks like
file I/O, strings, date and time, filesystem manipulation, etc. My main
gripe is having two regularly accepted libraries that do the same extremely
common functions; it makes us look unpolished, espec
== Quote from Jason House (jason.james.ho...@gmail.com)'s article
> Walter Bright Wrote:
> > Jason House wrote:
> > > There really is only three reasons I'm aware of that stop D2 Tango
> > > from existing today:
> > > [...]
> > > 2. There are bugs that limit how easily Tango can be ported to D2
>
Walter Bright Wrote:
> Jason House wrote:
> > There really is only three reasons I'm aware of that stop D2 Tango
> > from existing today:
> > [...]
> > 2. There are bugs that limit how easily Tango can be ported to D2
>
>
> I've heard this now and then, along with a bugzilla number or two. I'v
"Walter Bright" wrote in message
news:guafcv$1tm...@digitalmars.com...
> Ameer Armaly wrote:
>>> It has been bashed out for D2. Doing such changes to D1 will break
>>> everyone's D1 code, which destroys its mission of being stable.
>> Really? I was under the impression that Tango will be ported
Jason House wrote:
There really is only three reasons I'm aware of that stop D2 Tango
from existing today:
> [...]
2. There are bugs that limit how easily Tango can be ported to D2
I've heard this now and then, along with a bugzilla number or two. I've
fixed every one those problems brough
Ameer Armaly wrote:
It has been bashed out for D2. Doing such changes to D1 will break
everyone's D1 code, which destroys its mission of being stable.
Really? I was under the impression that Tango will be ported to D2 to
continue the battle of standard libs but if I'm mistaken, then it's a lot
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Isn't the demangle code taken from DMDFE?
It didn't look like it, especially since the DMDFE doesn't have a
demangler in it! The one in Phobos is explicitly listed as Public Domain.
Frits van Bommel, el 11 de mayo a las 22:15 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >GDB people have spoken (I don't see you subscribed to the bug report so
> >I transcribe the comment from GDB):
> >--
> >For a patch this s
Walter Bright, el 11 de mayo a las 14:03 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >>Hoping is one thing, but submitting patches, bug reports, etc. to the tool
> >>developers is much more effective!
> >Sure, but people already done that and got ignore. I'm just glad you only
> >overlooked that m
Ameer Armaly Wrote:
>
> "Walter Bright" wrote in message
> news:gua3u3$19c...@digitalmars.com...
> > Ameer Armaly wrote:
> >> Yes. This is the showstopper for me and what caused me to quietly walk
> >> away from D to begin with. In my opinion the fact that having two
> >> runtimes is not only
"Walter Bright" wrote in message
news:gua3u3$19c...@digitalmars.com...
> Ameer Armaly wrote:
>> Yes. This is the showstopper for me and what caused me to quietly walk
>> away from D to begin with. In my opinion the fact that having two
>> runtimes is not only tolerable but acceptable as normal
Ameer Armaly wrote:
Yes. This is the showstopper for me and what caused me to quietly walk away
from D to begin with. In my opinion the fact that having two runtimes is not
only tolerable but acceptable as normal has and will continue to hurt D1. We
have Phobos, the "official" runtime and then
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Hoping is one thing, but submitting patches, bug reports, etc. to the tool
developers is much more effective!
Sure, but people already done that and got ignore. I'm just glad you only
overlooked that mail and you're willing to help to iron out any licensing
issue.
I'm
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
GDB people have spoken (I don't see you subscribed to the bug report so
I transcribe the comment from GDB):
--
For a patch this size we would need copyright assignments from all
the authors of the pa
Walter Bright, el 11 de mayo a las 11:46 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >I just hope one day in a near future we have D support in the tools I use
> >daily to develop as good as C++ so I can have a chance to convince my boss
> >to be able to use it at work =)
>
> Hoping is one thing,
"Leandro Lucarella" wrote in message
news:20090509161148.ga23...@homero.springfield.home...
> The Tango vs. Phobos is still a *BIG* issue for D1. I think don't
> addressing that is a huge error. It's only hurting D1 and preventing its
> adoption.
>
Yes. This is the showstopper for me and what ca
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
I just hope one day in a near future we have D support in the tools I use
daily to develop as good as C++ so I can have a chance to convince my boss
to be able to use it at work =)
Hoping is one thing, but submitting patches, bug reports, etc. to the
tool developers is
Steve Teale wrote:
Georg Wrede Wrote:
Things we have (like every binary release [and I assume, an implicit
promise of keeping it that way] downloadable forever), the source code
to /both/ the front end and the back end distributed every time -- for
both reading example usage, learning by look
Tomas Lindquist Olsen, el 9 de mayo a las 15:55 me escribiste:
> The main feeling I've come to settle on during the soon two years I've
> spent with LDC, is: we need a new frontend! D1 and D2 both have these
> problems, and they're not going away by themselves.
Are you saying Dlang is comming? 8-
Walter Bright, el 10 de mayo a las 21:03 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >In case you missed my other mail, I opened a bug report in GDB bugzilla to
> >keep track of the patch:
> >http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10142
>
> This is great. I'm glad you're pushing this.
I j
Walter Bright, el 10 de mayo a las 20:54 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >Walter Bright, el 10 de mayo a las 15:44 me escribiste:
> >
> >>Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >>
> >There was a thread
> >in the NG asking for possible copyright issues to include the GDB patch
> >u
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
In case you missed my other mail, I opened a bug report in GDB bugzilla to
keep track of the patch:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10142
This is great. I'm glad you're pushing this.
Walter Bright, el 10 de mayo a las 15:42 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >Walter Bright, el 10 de mayo a las 11:21 me escribiste:
> >I posted it in this very same thread, just before the link to the GDB
> >patches link. Here it is again:
> >http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalm
Brad Roberts, el 10 de mayo a las 16:08 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>
> > I reported the bug because I think that could be the case. If is not, it's
> > a Gold bug and it should be reported. If it is, it should be fixed in DMD.
> > I don't have the knowlegde to check that myself, and
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> Brad Roberts, el 10 de mayo a las 10:12 me escribiste:
>> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>>
>>> How many people is using that? How bad would it be to call the next
>>> version of DMD that include the Tango/Druntime runtime D 1.100 or
>>> something (is really hard to pick right
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> I reported the bug because I think that could be the case. If is not, it's
> a Gold bug and it should be reported. If it is, it should be fixed in DMD.
> I don't have the knowlegde to check that myself, and that's why I reported
> the bug to both tools.
>
>> In other wo
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
There was a thread
in the NG asking for possible copyright issues to include the GDB patch
upstream, and it had no answer for example. I don't think you *have* to
answer that mail, but I think helping this kind of things happening
instead of ignoring them is good for D pr
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 10 de mayo a las 11:21 me escribiste:
I posted it in this very same thread, just before the link to the GDB
patches link. Here it is again:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/Getting_D_language_patch_into_GDB_82597.html
Thank you.
Gi
Walter Bright, el 10 de mayo a las 11:21 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >Walter Bright, el 9 de mayo a las 22:05 me escribiste:
> >>Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >>>Official? I don't see any official support for D in GDB. I can only find
> >>>this patches:
> >>>http://www.dsource.org/pro
Brad Roberts, el 10 de mayo a las 10:12 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>
> > How many people is using that? How bad would it be to call the next
> > version of DMD that include the Tango/Druntime runtime D 1.100 or
> > something (is really hard to pick right version numbers under the ve
Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:05 AM, mpt wrote:
>> I keep making 2 mistakes in my D programs, and fixing them feels
>> troublesome.
>>
>> 1. Null references. I get a segfault and gdb is useless (ldc thing maybe).
>
> Useless how? Generally LDC debug info should be dece
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 9 de mayo a las 22:05 me escribiste:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Official? I don't see any official support for D in GDB. I can only find
this patches:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/gdb-patches/
Dwarf has an official value for the language, DW_LANG_D
Brad Roberts, el 9 de mayo a las 21:42 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> > Brad Roberts, el 9 de mayo a las 12:31 me escribiste:
> >> If there's things that need to change in what the compiler emits, Walter
> >> has
> >> shown himself to be willing to rapidly change them where the requ
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> How many people is using that? How bad would it be to call the next
> version of DMD that include the Tango/Druntime runtime D 1.100 or
> something (is really hard to pick right version numbers under the version
> scheme you use[*]) to make clear there is compatibility b
It seems I didn't explain myself very clearly.
Daniel Keep wrote:
>> The point of non-nullables would be to detect improper usage at
>> compile-time, right? Then I don't believe this problem has an elegant
>> solution until compilers can do a rigorous control-flow analysis.
>> Specifying default
Walter Bright, el 9 de mayo a las 22:05 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >Official? I don't see any official support for D in GDB. I can only find
> >this patches:
> >http://www.dsource.org/projects/gdb-patches/
>
> Dwarf has an official value for the language, DW_LANG_D = 0x13.
I'm t
Michiel Helvensteijn wrote:
> ...
>
> The point of non-nullables would be to detect improper usage at
> compile-time, right? Then I don't believe this problem has an elegant
> solution until compilers can do a rigorous control-flow analysis.
> Specifying default pointer values other than null doe
Christopher Wright wrote:
>> About the null references, most people seem to agree that the right way
>> to fix that is with some sort of "non-nullable". But there's a lot of
>> disagreement on exactly how non-nullables should work.
>
> And whether they *can* work. D2 has struct constructors, so s
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
About the null references, most people seem to agree that the right way to
fix that is with some sort of "non-nullable". But there's a lot of
disagreement on exactly how non-nullables should work.
And whether they *can* work. D2 has struct constructors, so structs can
h
torhu wrote:
On 10.05.2009 00:05, mpt wrote:
I keep making 2 mistakes in my D programs, and fixing them feels
troublesome.
1. Null references. I get a segfault and gdb is useless (ldc thing
maybe).
2. Exceptions. It prints the msg nicely, but it's unhelpful in tracing
the real cause of error.
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Official? I don't see any official support for D in GDB. I can only find
this patches:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/gdb-patches/
Dwarf has an official value for the language, DW_LANG_D = 0x13.
How is that? Most runtime code is not used by the user directly. And fo
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> Brad Roberts, el 9 de mayo a las 12:31 me escribiste:
>> If there's things that need to change in what the compiler emits, Walter has
>> shown himself to be willing to rapidly change them where the required changes
>> are clearly described in terms of both 'what' and 'wh
Brad Roberts, el 9 de mayo a las 12:31 me escribiste:
> If there's things that need to change in what the compiler emits, Walter has
> shown himself to be willing to rapidly change them where the required changes
> are clearly described in terms of both 'what' and 'why'. In other words,
> "it's
Brad Roberts, el 9 de mayo a las 12:31 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >
> > Another very *BIG* issue is lack of mainstream tools support.
> >
> > C++98 was finished before starting C++0x. A lot of effort was made to make
> > mainstream tools to support C++. Most tools demangle C++ n
Walter Bright, el 9 de mayo a las 11:23 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >D1 is INCOMPLETE (for example pre/post conditions inheritance are
> >missing). I tend to forget which features are there for real what aren't
> >(there are a few, true, but still).
>
> Array ops weren't there for
On 10.05.2009 00:05, mpt wrote:
I keep making 2 mistakes in my D programs, and fixing them feels
troublesome.
1. Null references. I get a segfault and gdb is useless (ldc thing maybe).
2. Exceptions. It prints the msg nicely, but it's unhelpful in tracing
the real cause of error.
Shouldn't ther
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:05 AM, mpt wrote:
> I keep making 2 mistakes in my D programs, and fixing them feels
> troublesome.
>
> 1. Null references. I get a segfault and gdb is useless (ldc thing maybe).
Useless how? Generally LDC debug info should be decent. If not, we'd
be glad to look into w
"Nick Sabalausky" wrote in message
news:gu51vu$1e2...@digitalmars.com...
> "mpt" wrote in message
> news:gu4unq$16e...@digitalmars.com...
>>I keep making 2 mistakes in my D programs, and fixing them feels
>> troublesome.
>>
>> 1. Null references. I get a segfault and gdb is useless (ldc thing
"mpt" wrote in message
news:gu4unq$16e...@digitalmars.com...
>I keep making 2 mistakes in my D programs, and fixing them feels
> troublesome.
>
> 1. Null references. I get a segfault and gdb is useless (ldc thing maybe).
> 2. Exceptions. It prints the msg nicely, but it's unhelpful in tracing
> t
I keep making 2 mistakes in my D programs, and fixing them feels
troublesome.
1. Null references. I get a segfault and gdb is useless (ldc thing maybe).
2. Exceptions. It prints the msg nicely, but it's unhelpful in tracing
the real cause of error.
Shouldn't there be an automatic null check for r
Brad Roberts Wrote:
> Steve Teale wrote:
> > D is great. How do we spread that particular perception?
>
> Use it. Tell people you're using it. Produce tools, libraries, applications,
> whatever.. that are interesting enough that people want to know more.
>
> Later,
> Brad
I second this. A
Brad Roberts Wrote:
> Steve Teale wrote:
> > D is great. How do we spread that particular perception?
>
> Use it. Tell people you're using it. Produce tools, libraries, applications,
> whatever.. that are interesting enough that people want to know more.
>
> Later,
> Brad
I second this. A
Brad Roberts wrote:
Steve Teale wrote:
D is great. How do we spread that particular perception?
Use it. Tell people you're using it. Produce tools, libraries, applications,
whatever.. that are interesting enough that people want to know more.
Also write about it. Of all programming languag
Steve Teale wrote:
D is great. How do we spread that particular perception?
All these are free and effective:
Write articles/blogs about your experiences using D.
Submit patches for better D support for gnu tools like gdb.
Give a presentation on D at your local programmers' club meeting.
Su
Steve Teale wrote:
> D is great. How do we spread that particular perception?
Use it. Tell people you're using it. Produce tools, libraries, applications,
whatever.. that are interesting enough that people want to know more.
Later,
Brad
Georg Wrede Wrote:
> Things we have (like every binary release [and I assume, an implicit
> promise of keeping it that way] downloadable forever), the source code
> to /both/ the front end and the back end distributed every time -- for
> both reading example usage, learning by looking at unitte
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>
> Another very *BIG* issue is lack of mainstream tools support.
>
> C++98 was finished before starting C++0x. A lot of effort was made to make
> mainstream tools to support C++. Most tools demangle C++ names (even when
> they aren't standard!). At least GDB should be ab
Walter Bright wrote:
grauzone wrote:
But C++ programs still compile and run correctly with C++0x compilers.
True enough, but that wasn't true for C++98, or C89. Nobody refused to
use C or C++ because of that.
At the time, C[++] users didn't feel like they exactly had a choice, did
they?
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
D1 is INCOMPLETE (for example pre/post conditions inheritance are
missing). I tend to forget which features are there for real what aren't
(there are a few, true, but still).
Array ops weren't there for a long time, many argued that D1 wasn't
complete without them, and
Tomas Lindquist Olsen escribió:
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Walter Bright
wrote:
Steve Teale wrote:
I am not criticizing you. I think you are doing a great job under the
pressure of a slew of suggestions. But maybe a line in the sand at
some point?
But there *is* a line in the sand - D1.
Walter Bright, el 8 de mayo a las 11:56 me escribiste:
> Steve Teale wrote:
> >I am not criticizing you. I think you are doing a great job under the
> >pressure of a slew of suggestions. But maybe a line in the sand at
> >some point?
>
> But there *is* a line in the sand - D1.
>
> >OK so for tho
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Walter Bright
wrote:
> Steve Teale wrote:
>>
>> I am not criticizing you. I think you are doing a great job under the
>> pressure of a slew of suggestions. But maybe a line in the sand at
>> some point?
>
> But there *is* a line in the sand - D1.
>
>> OK so for thos
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
> Tyro[a.c.edwards] wrote:
> > On 5/9/2009 3:38 AM, Steve Teale wrote:
> >> Walter Bright Wrote:
> >>
> >>> Steve Teale wrote:
> This is the sort of answer that will kill D. The guy comes back after
> 2 years, asks a straight question, and get's told "business
BCS wrote:
Reply to F,
Finally, new releases are provided as optional, not as compulsory. If
someone wants to stick with one compiler version, he/she could do the
job with that version and that's all.
The one issue with that re 2.0 is that you can be faced with choosing
between working thou
Tyro[a.c.edwards] wrote:
On 5/9/2009 11:24 AM, grauzone wrote:
beyond and I'm quite sure that I'm not the only one. For all the
Naysayers out there... Keep saying nay and go the hell away. D2 is
just where it is supposed to be. Let’s not end up in the same mess we
did by trying to make impatient
torhu wrote:
On 09.05.2009 00:29, Christopher Wright wrote:
Open source projects tend to have to support wider ranges of compilers.
I've seen OSS projects where they prioritized issues specific to
gcc-3.4.2 as highly as any other issue, even if the developers typically
used the 4.x branch.
Tha
Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
> Lutger wrote:
>
>> - these other languages go out of their way to make new releases
>> backwards
>> compatible, sometimes at great costs. They almost never completely
>> succeed
>> though.
>
> And D1 makes an effort to follow the spec, and will not incorporate
> break
grauzone wrote:
beyond and I'm quite sure that I'm not the only one. For all the
Naysayers out there... Keep saying nay and go the hell away. D2 is
just where it is supposed to be. Let’s not end up in the same mess we
did by trying to make impatient people happy and releasing D1.
What about t
On 5/9/2009 11:24 AM, grauzone wrote:
beyond and I'm quite sure that I'm not the only one. For all the
Naysayers out there... Keep saying nay and go the hell away. D2 is
just where it is supposed to be. Let’s not end up in the same mess we
did by trying to make impatient people happy and releasin
On Fri, 08 May 2009 16:20:48 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
> Frank Benoit wrote:
>> can you allow "shared" or "__gshared" in D1 as do-nothing keywords? That
>> will make it more easy to write code that compiles for D1 and D2.
>> Or is there a trick to accomplish this?
>
> I think that making code t
Tyro[a.c.edwards] wrote:
On 5/9/2009 3:38 AM, Steve Teale wrote:
Walter Bright Wrote:
Steve Teale wrote:
This is the sort of answer that will kill D. The guy comes back after
2 years, asks a straight question, and get's told "business as usual,
we're still arguing among ourselves about what i
beyond and I'm quite sure that I'm not the only one. For all the
Naysayers out there... Keep saying nay and go the hell away. D2 is just
where it is supposed to be. Let’s not end up in the same mess we did by
trying to make impatient people happy and releasing D1.
What about the people who wan
On 5/9/2009 3:38 AM, Steve Teale wrote:
Walter Bright Wrote:
Steve Teale wrote:
This is the sort of answer that will kill D. The guy comes back after
2 years, asks a straight question, and get's told "business as usual,
we're still arguing among ourselves about what it should be".
Maybe Tiobe
grauzone wrote:
Nearly all of those are due to inadvertent reliance on bugs in D1. You
see this quite a bit in the C++ world. Every time g++ gets updated, I
have to tweak something in my sources.
In the case of D, the problem is that sometimes you don't really know if
it's a bug or a feat
Lutger wrote:
- these other languages go out of their way to make new releases
backwards
compatible, sometimes at great costs. They almost never completely
succeed
though.
And D1 makes an effort to follow the spec, and will not incorporate
breaking changes. D2 is, in many ways, a whole new
On 09.05.2009 00:29, Christopher Wright wrote:
Open source projects tend to have to support wider ranges of compilers.
I've seen OSS projects where they prioritized issues specific to
gcc-3.4.2 as highly as any other issue, even if the developers typically
used the 4.x branch.
That's probably b
Frank Benoit wrote:
can you allow "shared" or "__gshared" in D1 as do-nothing keywords? That
will make it more easy to write code that compiles for D1 and D2.
Or is there a trick to accomplish this?
I think that making code that will compile under both is an impractical
task.
Sean Kelly wrote:
It's a way to declare something as "classic global" so you can sidestep any bugs
that crop up with the implementation of 'shared'. The hope is that you'll
eventually just be able to do a search/replace of '__gshared' to 'shared' once
everything is working correctly.
I like th
dsimcha wrote:
Just out of curiosity,
though, you use __gshared in a lot of places and I haven't seen it in any of the
discussions. What is it?
__gshared is the "cowboy" approach, it means make it global and I don't
care about any weenie synchronization or type checking. It's handy for
initi
Lutger wrote:
> - other mainstream languages release new compilers and features every couple
> of years, you do so every couple of months!
Rapid evolution is a good thing. For every improvement that will be
made to the D2 language, I'd rather see that improvement in a week than
in a couple of ye
Sean Kelly wrote:
== Quote from Steve Teale (steve.te...@britseyeview.com)'s article
OK so for those who crave stability there is D1.x, but when all the focus
appears to be on D2, what level of confidence is afforded to
D1 users. Can a project Manager cross his heart and say that D1 will still
Walter Bright schrieb:
> dsimcha wrote:
>> Exactly my feelings, but I'll add that the time to make huge, sweeping
>> changes
>> like the ones we're seeing now is before the language becomes
>> mainstream. Once
>> the language has a large base of crufty production code that nobody still
>> understa
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
