Hi everyone,
I think announcing a new Mono-D release on all operating systems
over here might be handy, as I redently wasn't able to figure out
how to build a version that is compatible to the stable MD's API,
which led me to a phase of striking against releasing a new one
on windows..but anyway,
This time, the addin should be compatible to older beta
versions of
MonoDevelop (like 4.0.12) as well – so feel free to simply try
it out.
_very_ glad to hear that. Thanks for your work!
On Tuesday, 8 October 2013 at 13:21:17 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
This time, the addin should be compatible to older beta
versions of
MonoDevelop (like 4.0.12) as well – so feel free to simply try
it out.
_very_ glad to hear that. Thanks for your work!
Can't guarantee anything! I've just work-aroun
On Tuesday, 8 October 2013 at 13:21:17 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
This time, the addin should be compatible to older beta
versions of
MonoDevelop (like 4.0.12) as well – so feel free to simply try
it out.
_very_ glad to hear that. Thanks for your work!
Tried it with 4.0.12 - it failed to open even
Am Tue, 08 Oct 2013 18:43:59 +0200
schrieb "Alex" :
> On Tuesday, 8 October 2013 at 13:21:17 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> >> This time, the addin should be compatible to older beta
> >> versions of
> >> MonoDevelop (like 4.0.12) as well – so feel free to simply try
> >> it out.
> >
> > _very_ glad to h
On Tuesday, 8 October 2013 at 18:03:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
BTW:
MonoDevelop is broken on Gnome 3.10 now. They changed something
in gnome-terminal and now MonoDevelop can't open the terminal
anymore :-( Disabling the external console should work but
MonoDevelop
seems to ignore that option.
On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
Are there any plans/tricks/hacks on how to get programs built
with dmd debuggable with gdb? Then we also could release the
addin for Windows as well!
(Afaik I asked the same question some time ago, but well, perhaps
something did change over the time :-
On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 at 12:38:40 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
wrote:
On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
Are there any plans/tricks/hacks on how to get programs built
with dmd debuggable with gdb? Then we also could release the
addin for Windows as well!
(Afaik I asked the same question
On 10/16/13 5:38 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
Are there any plans/tricks/hacks on how to get programs built
with dmd debuggable with gdb? Then we also could release the
addin for Windows as well!
(Afaik I asked the same question some time ago, but well, p
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu <
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
> On 10/16/13 5:38 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>
>> On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
>>
>>> Are there any plans/tricks/hacks on how to get programs built
>>> with dmd debuggable with gdb? Then we
On 2013-10-17 09:42, Timothee Cour wrote:
on OSX, lldb has better support than gdb.
Not for D. Break points doesn't work in LLDB but they do work in GDB.
The backtrace seem to be slightly incorrect as well. The line number for
frame 0 is off by one. Printing a variable doesn't seem to work.
On 16/10/2013 13:42, Dicebot wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 at 12:38:40 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
Are there any plans/tricks/hacks on how to get programs built
with dmd debuggable with gdb? Then we also could release the
addin for Windows as we
On 16/10/2013 22:21, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 10/16/13 5:38 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
Are there any plans/tricks/hacks on how to get programs built
with dmd debuggable with gdb? Then we also could release the
addin for Windows as well!
(Afaik I a
On 18 October 2013 12:43, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> On 16/10/2013 22:21, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>
>> On 10/16/13 5:38 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
Are there any plans/tricks/hacks on how to get programs built
with dmd debuggable wi
On 18/10/2013 12:58, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 18 October 2013 12:43, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
On 16/10/2013 22:21, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 10/16/13 5:38 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
Are there any plans/tricks/hacks on how to get programs built
with
On 18 October 2013 21:58, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 18 October 2013 12:43, Bruno Medeiros
> wrote:
> > On 16/10/2013 22:21, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/16/13 5:38 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander Bothe wrote:
>
> Are there any plans/tric
On 22 October 2013 13:29, Manu wrote:
> On 18 October 2013 21:58, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> On 18 October 2013 12:43, Bruno Medeiros
>> wrote:
>> > On 16/10/2013 22:21, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 10/16/13 5:38 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On 08/10/2013 14:18, Alexander B
On 22 October 2013 23:48, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 22 October 2013 13:29, Manu wrote:
> > On 18 October 2013 21:58, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> >>
> >> On 18 October 2013 12:43, Bruno Medeiros >
> >> wrote:
> >> > On 16/10/2013 22:21, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 10/16/13 5:38 AM, Bru
On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 14:39:55 UTC, Manu wrote:
Well whatever object format it is, it seems it's not COFF by
default, [...]
---
$ gcc --version && gcc -c test.c && file test.o
gcc.exe (rubenvb-4.8.0) 4.8.0
Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the
On 22 October 2013 15:58, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 14:39:55 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>
>> Well whatever object format it is, it seems it's not COFF by default,
>> [...]
>
>
> ---
> $ gcc --version && gcc -c test.c && file test.o
> gcc.exe (rubenvb-4.8.0) 4.8.0
> Copyright (
On 23 October 2013 01:02, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 22 October 2013 15:58, David Nadlinger wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 14:39:55 UTC, Manu wrote:
> >>
> >> Well whatever object format it is, it seems it's not COFF by default,
> >> [...]
> >
> >
> > ---
> > $ gcc --version && gcc -c te
On 22 October 2013 16:59, Manu wrote:
> On 23 October 2013 01:02, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> On 22 October 2013 15:58, David Nadlinger wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 14:39:55 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Well whatever object format it is, it seems it's not COFF by default,
>> >> [...]
On 22/10/2013 14:48, Iain Buclaw wrote:
If you are using GCC, you'll be using the GCC toolchain. If you are
using MSVC, you'll be using the MSVC toolchain. It's as black and
white as that.
I know. The point, for me at least, was not weather I could use GCC + MS
debuggers or MS compilers +
On 22/10/2013 16:59, Manu wrote:
...okay. Ignore me!
You said "GCC _is able_ to emit COFF object code", which didn't make it
sound like it did, or at least not by default. Which seemed to match my
experience (from years ago).
I recall a conversation with Daniel Green about making a special
COFF-o
24 matches
Mail list logo
