Real professionals won't have difficulties to find binaries for ldc: https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases
-- Bien cordialement, Ch.Meessen > Le 10 juin 2016 à 22:30, Joerg Joergonson via Digitalmars-d-learn > <digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> a écrit : > >> On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 19:51:19 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote: >>> On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 19:37:13 UTC, Joerg Joergonson wrote: >>> arm-linux-genuabi? arm-linux-gnueableihfqueridsofeyfh? >>> aifh-fkeif-fjjjjjjjj-fdsskjhfkjfafaaaaaa? >> >> Rofl! >> >>> and ldc requires building from sources(actually I didn't have too much >>> trouble with installing it but it doesn't work with my libs because of the >>> crappy coff issues that D has had since birth(it's like a tumor)). >> >> Why do you have to build from sources? Any details about the problems you >> see? >> >> Thanks, >> Johan > > Well, the post was a bit incoherent because getting all this stuff working > is. I was searching for ldc and ran across some web site that had only the > sources(same for gdc). > > The point of it all is that things seem to be a bit discombobulated and make > D look bad. Professions won't use D if it can't be used professionally(not > that I'm a pro, just saying). > > Why isn't there a proper binaries for ldc and gdc that work out of the box > like dmd? There used to be. What's up with all this arm-linux-genuabi crap? > When one opens up the archive all the files are named that way too. There is > no explanation of what that means. Did some kid write this stuff in his > basement or is this suppose to be serious? Do people think about the end user > when creating this stuff or is it just a eureka moment "Lightbulb: Lets > create some spaghetti!". > > I would have thought things would have gotten easier and more logical but > that doesn't seem to be the case. > >
