```
"toolchainRequirements": {
"frontend": "==2.096"
},
```
Thanks! I didn't know you could specify a toolchain version. I
agree it would be cool if it automatically downloaded the correct
version of compiler, but this will be helpful. Is it possible to
download old versions of the compiler somewhere?
On Thursday, 4 March 2021 at 10:22:51 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 March 2021 at 23:30:20 UTC, harakim wrote:
Contrast to me trying to figure out how to format a number in
binary. format!"%b"(number) does not work but is very similar
to what is suggested in the documentation. I was able to
figure out it's format("%b", number) but it took a few minutes.
This works for me:
rdmd --eval="writeln(format!`%b`(5));"
101
rdmd --eval="writeln(__VERSION__);"
2096
-- Bastiaan.
I want this almost every week at work. When I run into some
trivial statement that I need to know for sure how it works, it's
rarely worth it to create a whole new file and make a main method
and all that. I just edit and run the entire program again, which
is a waste of time.
So about ten seconds later:
PS> rdmd --eval="writeln(format!`%b`(5));"
~\AppData\Local\Temp\.rdmd\eval.F4ADE5F0F88B126B82870415B197BF60.d(18): Error:
template argument expected following `!`
Failed: ["C:\\Program Files\\D\\dmd2\\windows\\bin\\dmd.exe",
"-d", "-v", "-o-",
"~\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\.rdmd\\eval.F4ADE5F0F88B126B82870415B197BF60.d", "-I~\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\.rdmd"]
PS> rdmd --eval="writeln(__VERSION__);"
2095
That was pretty sweet. However, it kind of goes to the point of
my post. A one-revision difference means the documentation is not
accurate for my compiler.
I'm not saying the language shouldn't evolve, I'm just saying it
might make sense to keep compatibility changes to every 6 months
or a year. Then you could keep the old documentation around for
the old version, and create new documentation for the new version
and no matter which version someone is using they would have
documentation (within limits.)
Depending on how long I can keep at this project, I would be down
to host my source wherever it needs to be hosted (provided it's
git) to get the new-version-check feature. I might even pay a bit
for it. I doubt that makes it worth it, but I thought I'd throw
that out there in case more people agree.
I like D. I like that D is changing. To go along with that, I
would like a little more predictability with major version
releases. I see there is a lot more documentation than the last
time I checked so I'll take a deeper look at that.
