Re: D 2.062 release

On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 09:30:24 Lubos Pintes wrote: > And what about druntime.lib. Is it there? > Or is it not needed? druntime is linked in as part of Phobos, so all you need is phobos.lib. It hasn't been packaged as a separate library for quite a while now. - Jonathan M Davis

Re: D 2.062 release

And what about druntime.lib. Is it there? Or is it not needed? Dňa 27. 2. 2013 9:08 timotheecour wrote / napísal(a): I forgot to include VERSION in the zip file. Its contents are: 2.062 all on one line. I'll fix the packages. has this been done? it still seems the zip file doesn't contain it

Re: D 2.062 release

I forgot to include VERSION in the zip file. Its contents are: 2.062 all on one line. I'll fix the packages. has this been done? it still seems the zip file doesn't contain it.

Re: D 2.062 release

On Wednesday, 20 February 2013 at 06:39:12 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote: On 02/19/2013 09:57 PM, Zach the Mystic wrote: > Each developer who works on bugs and enhancements for a given release > can keep a private journal, some small text file somewhere. +1 Although, I have seen this done in Bugzilla

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/13 6:01 PM, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/18/2013 11:17 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-02-18 21:58, Walter Bright wrote: I forgot to include VERSION in the zip file. Its contents are: 2.062 all on one line. I'll fix the packages. Do you have an automated script for packing up the zi

Re: D 2.062 release

On 02/19/2013 09:57 PM, Zach the Mystic wrote: > Each developer who works on bugs and enhancements for a given release > can keep a private journal, some small text file somewhere. +1 Although, I have seen this done in Bugzilla itself: Every bug has a field that contains what goes into the rel

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:31:47 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: But I just want to throw in my 2 cents about the new changelog format. It's impossible now to tell at a glance what the major changes/fixes are. Clicking through four links to find them is bad enough, but the layout and color schem

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/2013 8:29 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: On 2/19/13, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: I can see now there's a d.chm file in \bin. Walter that .chm file you're distributing in Windows\bin is v2.058 (judging by the changelog), or some other version, but it definitely isn't the latest because document

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/13, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > I can see now there's a d.chm file in \bin. Walter that .chm file you're distributing in Windows\bin is v2.058 (judging by the changelog), or some other version, but it definitely isn't the latest because documentation is missing (e.g. getProtection trait). W

Re: D 2.062 release

Yes, that's because the web site was pushed from master rather than the 2.062 branch. http://dlang.org/phobos/index.html#std Duplicates: std: Core library modules std.base64 Functions that operate on ASCII characters. std.base64 Encode/decode base64 format.

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2013-02-19 22:01, Walter Bright wrote: Yes, I do use a script. The script has to copy all the correct files over to the right place. VERSION is a new file in a new place, and the script needed updating to copy that one. Automation is great, and I use it. But files appear, disappear, and chan

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/2013 8:10 AM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: On 2/18/13, Walter Bright wrote: The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. The dlang changelog lists the release date as Jan 4, 2013, this is wrong. http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_062 Yes, that's because the web s

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/2013 11:17 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-02-18 21:58, Walter Bright wrote: I forgot to include VERSION in the zip file. Its contents are: 2.062 all on one line. I'll fix the packages. Do you have an automated script for packing up the zip file? If not, this is the time to create

Re: D 2.062 release

19-Feb-2013 21:00, Dmitry Olshansky пишет: 19-Feb-2013 20:30, Andrej Mitrovic пишет: On 2/18/13, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: This D script dumps all fixed bugs between 2 dates as DDOC entries. https://gist.github.com/blackwhale/3734045 (or just starting from one date till today). That being said

Re: D 2.062 release

19-Feb-2013 20:30, Andrej Mitrovic пишет: On 2/18/13, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: This D script dumps all fixed bugs between 2 dates as DDOC entries. https://gist.github.com/blackwhale/3734045 (or just starting from one date till today). That being said I've brought it up like 5 times already. Mu

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/13, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: > This D script dumps all fixed bugs between 2 dates as DDOC entries. > https://gist.github.com/blackwhale/3734045 > > (or just starting from one date till today). > > That being said I've brought it up like 5 times already. > Must be not what you are looking fo

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/13, Walter Bright wrote: > The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. The dlang changelog lists the release date as Jan 4, 2013, this is wrong. http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_062

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2013-02-19 15:21, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: If you mean this: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1485 That wasn't pulled yet. There's a partial implementation for documented unittests, but it's not fully implemented. There's several pulls that need to be merged to make it usefu

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/13, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > I agree. I think documenting mixins was added in this release. If you mean this: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1485 That wasn't pulled yet. There's a partial implementation for documented unittests, but it's not fully implemented. There's

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2013-02-18 21:58, Walter Bright wrote: I forgot to include VERSION in the zip file. Its contents are: 2.062 all on one line. I'll fix the packages. Do you have an automated script for packing up the zip file? If not, this is the time to create one. We have seen this problem before, IIRC.

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2013-02-19 07:25, Kapps wrote: Personally, I just wish there was a quick blurb at the top of the changelog indicating the highlights of this release. For example, with 2.058, the very first two lines of the changelog were: "Add new => lambda syntax." "Allow 1.userproperty syntax. NOTE: 1.f is

Re: D 2.062 release

Personally, I just wish there was a quick blurb at the top of the changelog indicating the highlights of this release. For example, with 2.058, the very first two lines of the changelog were: "Add new => lambda syntax." "Allow 1.userproperty syntax. NOTE: 1.f is no longer a float literal, add a

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/2013 1:18 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: This D script dumps all fixed bugs between 2 dates as DDOC entries. https://gist.github.com/blackwhale/3734045 (or just starting from one date till today). That being said I've brought it up like 5 times already. Must be not what you are looking for

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/2013 6:46 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 01:31:47 -0500, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 10:18 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 6:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: Compare the earlier changelogs with the bugzilla entries. It's EX

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/13, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > Error while processing file: .\spec.html > object.Error: Access Violation I've filed it: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9533

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/13, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > On 2/19/13, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: >> On 2/18/13, Walter Bright wrote: >>> http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html >> >> Argh the chm generation is awful now. > > I mean when I try to generate the .chm file myself. I can see now there's a "chm" target in the

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/13, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > On 2/18/13, Walter Bright wrote: >> http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html > > Argh the chm generation is awful now. I mean when I try to generate the .chm file myself. I can see now there's a d.chm file in \bin. It doesn't have loading issues, however there

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/13, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > On 2/18/13, Walter Bright wrote: >> http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html > > Argh the chm generation is awful now. I have to wait 5 seconds every > time I open a page in CHM (only the pages not in Phobos like language > reference, how-to's, etc). Sometimes h

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/19/13, Brad Roberts wrote: > How about writing one for 2.062 that can be inserted into the change log > instead of the current links rather than a mockup that might represent > what a change log might look like? Yes. I'll get to it and make a pull request once it's ready.

Re: D 2.062 release

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > On 2/18/13, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > > I agree we need to improve on this. One way to achieve that, seeing as > > marketing is not Walter's focus, is to denote a release czar who has > > that particular task around releases. Andrej, would you want

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/13, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > I agree we need to improve on this. One way to achieve that, seeing as > marketing is not Walter's focus, is to denote a release czar who has > that particular task around releases. Andrej, would you want to try that > role? How about I write how a release

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:31:47 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:02:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I've lost the motivation to even look at the changelog now. +1

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/2013 9:02 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:02:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. Has anyone even tested the release package? I get make: *** No rule

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/2013 8:47 AM, Bill Baxter wrote: Must be a problem with mobile Chrome then. Probably not specific to the new change log handling. In chrome that entire content pane has a tendency to disappear. I'm still not sure if you're referring to the changelog.html page or the bugzilla page.

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, February 18, 2013 18:43:37 Dmitry Olshansky wrote: > 18-Feb-2013 17:22, Leandro Lucarella пишет: > >> I also would love to see an automatically generated changelog > >> similar to the original based on the bugzilla data. Can we add a > >> "changelog description" field to bug reports so i

Re: D 2.062 release

Am Sun, 17 Feb 2013 17:02:20 -0800 schrieb Walter Bright : > http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html > > The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. I didn't read the whole thread now. Just reporting that the .zip package cannot be compiled due to missing VERSION file and t

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:02:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. Has anyone even tested the release package? I get make: *** No rule to make target `../VERSION', needed by `verstr.

Re: D 2.062 release

Must be a problem with mobile Chrome then. Probably not specific to the new change log handling. In chrome that entire content pane has a tendency to disappear. --bb Sent from my Android. On Feb 17, 2013 11:20 PM, "Walter Bright" wrote: > On 2/17/2013 5:40 PM, Bill Baxter wrote: > >> The new cha

Re: D 2.062 release

18-Feb-2013 13:18, Dmitry Olshansky пишет: 18-Feb-2013 11:31, Walter Bright пишет: On 2/17/2013 11:23 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-02-18 07:31, Walter Bright wrote: Since I (and Jonathan) wrote the changelog, I can attest that I cut & pasted it character for character out of the bugzilla

Re: D 2.062 release

On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 01:31:47 -0500, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 10:18 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 6:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: Compare the earlier changelogs with the bugzilla entries. It's EXACTLY THE SAME TEXT. EXACTLY. No it isn't.

Re: D 2.062 release

18-Feb-2013 17:22, Leandro Lucarella пишет: I also would love to see an automatically generated changelog similar to the original based on the bugzilla data. Can we add a "changelog description" field to bug reports so if the bug description (which arguably shouldn't be changed) isn't a very goo

Re: D 2.062 release

David Nadlinger, el 18 de February a las 11:55 me escribiste: > On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 10:07:58 UTC, Leandro Lucarella > wrote: > >Again, the problem is making the changelog update optional! No > >pull > >request should be merged if it doesn't include a proper changelog > >entry, > >that's

Re: D 2.062 release

Steven Schveighoffer, el 18 de February a las 00:37 me escribiste: > I propose that when you post the beta on the mailing list, you also > post the reports of the fixed bugs and enhancements. Then people > can edit the descriptions before the release. Then I think after > the release, the descrip

Re: D 2.062 release

dlangspec v2.062 in several formats: dlangspec.chm dlangspec.epub dlangspec.mobi dlangspec.pdf

Re: D 2.062 release

Am Mon, 18 Feb 2013 03:10:27 +0100 schrieb Andrej Mitrovic : > For the next release I propose that we get more involved in the > release process: > > - We make an agreement on when exactly a release is made, without > wondering when Walter might end up doing it himself. Maybe we should agree on

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 10:55:39 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote: On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 10:07:58 UTC, Leandro Lucarella wrote: Again, the problem is making the changelog update optional! No pull request should be merged if it doesn't include a proper changelog entry, that's how it's

Re: D 2.062 release

Am Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:05:10 +0100 schrieb Leandro Lucarella : > Steven Schveighoffer, el 17 de February a las 22:36 me escribiste: > > >Also, anyone can go in and change the bugzilla issue titles to > > >make them more readable. > > > > That actually is not a good thing... Anyone can maliciousl

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 10:55:39 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote: On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 10:07:58 UTC, Leandro Lucarella wrote: Again, the problem is making the changelog update optional! No pull request should be merged if it doesn't include a proper changelog entry, that's how it's

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 10:07:58 UTC, Leandro Lucarella wrote: Again, the problem is making the changelog update optional! No pull request should be merged if it doesn't include a proper changelog entry, that's how it's done. We tried that in the past, and it lead to tons of merging er

Re: D 2.062 release

Walter Bright, el 17 de February a las 19:54 me escribiste: > If someone wants to step up and take charge of doing a better job > with the changelog, I'm all for it. The old way was NOT a better > job. It was usually left to me (and Jonathan) to try to cobble > something together. When I was the on

Re: D 2.062 release

18-Feb-2013 11:31, Walter Bright пишет: On 2/17/2013 11:23 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-02-18 07:31, Walter Bright wrote: Since I (and Jonathan) wrote the changelog, I can attest that I cut & pasted it character for character out of the bugzilla titles, and received no comments or complai

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2013-02-18 10:02, Joshua Niehus wrote: On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 07:31:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: As long as it isn't written in Ruby :-) But more seriously, a D tool to do it might be interesting. Here is a simpleton hack: ### RUBY require "nokogiri" require "open-uri" # provided

Re: D 2.062 release

Steven Schveighoffer, el 17 de February a las 22:36 me escribiste: > >Also, anyone can go in and change the bugzilla issue titles to > >make them more readable. > > That actually is not a good thing... Anyone can maliciously affect > the changlog, or alter the changelog at some later point becaus

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2013-02-18 08:31, Walter Bright wrote: As long as it isn't written in Ruby :-) I was not referring to what's usually called a "scripting language". I was referring to a script, regardless of language. -- /Jacob Carlborg

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 07:31:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: As long as it isn't written in Ruby :-) But more seriously, a D tool to do it might be interesting. Here is a simpleton hack: ### RUBY require "nokogiri" require "open-uri" # provided the urls are given changes_new_features_ur

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 07:09:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 10:27 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: I'm happy that "http://dlang.org/changelog.html"; no longer shows a link for a yet-to-be-released version of DMD (no sarcasm intended), but the release date listed for 2.062 is wrong

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 11:23 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-02-18 07:31, Walter Bright wrote: Since I (and Jonathan) wrote the changelog, I can attest that I cut & pasted it character for character out of the bugzilla titles, and received no comments or complaints about it. I did it that way because p

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2013-02-18 07:31, Walter Bright wrote: Since I (and Jonathan) wrote the changelog, I can attest that I cut & pasted it character for character out of the bugzilla titles, and received no comments or complaints about it. I did it that way because people on the n.g. asked me to do it that way.

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2013-02-18 06:37, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: I agree, we need a better system. Manually edited has its faults, and the current system has its faults. We could have a section that is edited manually with some important highlights with proper full description of new features and deprecate

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sunday, February 17, 2013 23:08:41 Walter Bright wrote: > On 2/17/2013 10:27 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > > I'm happy that "http://dlang.org/changelog.html"; no longer shows a link > > for a yet-to-be-released version of DMD (no sarcasm intended), but the > > release date listed for 2.062 is wro

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 5:40 PM, Bill Baxter wrote: The new change log also seems inaccessible from mobile. (At least it seems to freak out chrome on android). I tried it on my ipod with Safari. Both changelog.html and bugzilla render fine, though it helps to turn the ipod sideways to get 'landscape' mod

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 10:27 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: I'm happy that "http://dlang.org/changelog.html"; no longer shows a link for a yet-to-be-released version of DMD (no sarcasm intended), but the release date listed for 2.062 is wrong. Probably because the site was generated from the master branch ra

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 23:03:55 -0800, dnewbie wrote: On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:02:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. Thank you Walter Bright. I appreciate your work. +1 -- Adam Wils

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:02:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. Thank you Walter Bright. I appreciate your work.

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 10:18 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 6:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: Compare the earlier changelogs with the bugzilla entries. It's EXACTLY THE SAME TEXT. EXACTLY. No it isn't. Since I (and Jonathan) wrote the changelog, I can attest that

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:30:27 -0500 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 2/17/13 8:02 PM, Walter Bright wrote: > > http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html > > > > The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. > > I've updated the website, too. Enjoy! > I'm happy that "http://dlan

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 17:56:20 -0800 Walter Bright wrote: > On 2/17/2013 5:40 PM, Bill Baxter wrote: > > The new change log also seems inaccessible from mobile. (At least > > it seems to freak out chrome on android). > > The changelog.html uses the same template as the rest of the > dconf.org site

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 18:44:18 -0800 Walter Bright wrote: > On 2/17/2013 6:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > > Let me give you some examples of "new features" > > > > std.array.replace compile error (string and immutable string) > > There's no Duration.max > > Document extern properly > > etc. >

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 9:37 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: I propose that when you post the beta on the mailing list, you also post the reports of the fixed bugs and enhancements. Then people can edit the descriptions before the release. Then I think after the release, the descriptions should be locked,

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 22:54:54 -0500, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 7:36 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:44:18 -0500, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 6:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: Let me give you some examples of "new features" std.array.replace compi

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 7:36 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:44:18 -0500, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 6:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: Let me give you some examples of "new features" std.array.replace compile error (string and immutable string) There's no Duration.max D

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:44:18 -0500, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 6:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: Let me give you some examples of "new features" std.array.replace compile error (string and immutable string) There's no Duration.max Document extern properly etc. Compare the earlie

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 6:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: Let me give you some examples of "new features" std.array.replace compile error (string and immutable string) There's no Duration.max Document extern properly etc. Compare the earlier changelogs with the bugzilla entries. It's EXACTLY THE SAME

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/13 8:02 PM, Walter Bright wrote: http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. I've updated the website, too. Enjoy! Andrei

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/13 9:10 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: On 2/18/13, Mike Parker wrote: But I just want to throw in my 2 cents about the new changelog format. Not just the changelog, but this release announcement too. Two sentences, without any information about what is being released, who is involved, and

Re: D 2.062 release

Walter Bright: I'm sorry, I'm baffled at this. I read bugzilla entries all day long, but I think as a release page information that page gives too much information (the Sev Pri OS Assignee Status Resolution columns) that's just distracting noise. Sometimes giving less is more. Bye, b

Re: D 2.062 release

Walter Bright: I'm sorry, I'm baffled at this. I too prefer the precedent style of the changelog. Sometimes the reality is more complex than the frame you try to shove it in :-) Reality of human brains is complex. Bye, bearophile

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 20:55:21 -0500, Walter Bright wrote: On 2/17/2013 5:31 PM, Mike Parker wrote: Love the new release! Thanks to everyone who contributed. But I just want to throw in my 2 cents about the new changelog format. It's impossible now to tell at a glance what the major changes/

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/18/13, Mike Parker wrote: > But I just want to throw in my 2 cents about the new changelog format. Not just the changelog, but this release announcement too. Two sentences, without any information about what is being released, who is involved, and a short few sentences on what's new. Very co

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 5:40 PM, Bill Baxter wrote: The new change log also seems inaccessible from mobile. (At least it seems to freak out chrome on android). The changelog.html uses the same template as the rest of the dconf.org site.

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 5:31 PM, Mike Parker wrote: Love the new release! Thanks to everyone who contributed. But I just want to throw in my 2 cents about the new changelog format. It's impossible now to tell at a glance what the major changes/fixes are. It wasn't before, either. It was a list sorted by b

Re: D 2.062 release

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 20:31:45 -0500, Mike Parker wrote: On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:02:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. Love the new release! Thanks to everyone who contributed. But I

Re: D 2.062 release

The new change log also seems inaccessible from mobile. (At least it seems to freak out chrome on android). --bb Sent from my Android. On Feb 17, 2013 5:25 PM, "Brad Roberts" wrote: > On 2/17/2013 5:07 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > > On 2/18/13, Walter Bright wrote: > >> http://digitalmars.com/d

Re: D 2.062 release

On Monday, 18 February 2013 at 01:02:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. Love the new release! Thanks to everyone who contributed. But I just want to throw in my 2 cents about the new changelog

Re: D 2.062 release

On 2/17/2013 5:07 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > On 2/18/13, Walter Bright wrote: >> http://digitalmars.com/d/download.html >> >> The dlang.org site isn't updated yet, but the downloads are there. >> > > The zip download is broken: > http://downloads.dlang.org.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rel