On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 17:06:37 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 09:21:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 14:41:34 UTC, Daniel Kozak
wrote:
AFAIK ld on mingw can`t link against mscoff file format so it
is not very usable.
It's dmd/optlink that don't support mscoff, mingw supports
only mscoff.
LLD is quite new so I do not know how production ready is.
AFAIK that's only because of lack of support for debug info.
The rest works.
Btw. today I want to start working on a D project in work,
but I cant, because there is not enoght space on C:\ partion
and there is not possible to instal VS to another disk :( (Ok
in few attempt of installing VS there has been path I can
change but it does not work anyway, still VS is trying to
install to C:\ ).
My system drive is filled with 80gb and it has 3 versions of
VS, 2 ssms, sdk and whatnot installed on it. If your system
drive doesn't stretch, you should consider what you fill it
with as you would do in old good days.
Another issue I had with the Microsoft Package besides the size
it wants on the system drive is the difficulty to even get it
to download behind a corporate proxy. It took me hours to find
a disk image version of the (free) visual stuff on the rotten
Microsoft sites.
I get the technical reasons for using the MS toolchain but that
doesn't change the fact that it is an ugly wart that has
several negative aspect. Because in addition to the cases
already described where it can be a pita to install there's
also an image problem with that approach. dmd's adoption had
always suffered from the closed source licence of the backend
with one small company, adding a second depency, furthermore on
a company not specially known for its openess (yeah, I know
that it's a little bit better now) will raise criticism.
This issue is not big but it is definitely a - point when one
makes a checklist of + and - points for a language (just a
semi-related question, what's the state of play in the
concurrent languages go, rust, scala etc...?)
Ok, I checked for Rust. They have 2 ABI versions one with MSVC
and the other for gcc in 32 and 64 bits. MSVC ABI requires the
same build tools from Microsoft, so the situation is the same
there.
go doesn't need the MS tools apparently.
