"Steven Schveighoffer" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 02:49:33 -0500, Nick Sabalausky <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The limitations of the current std.process are getting to be a big pain >> in >> my ass for script-style programs. Last I heard, the new std.process was >> blocked by "issues with the DMC runtime prevent it from working on >> Windows". >> >> What's up with that? Any news or any specifics? And more hopefully: Any >> workarounds to the windows issue so I could at least grab it and use it >> pre-acceptance-into-phobos? > > I had a pull request into dmc, Walter said that he would merge it after > this past release of dmd. I did not see any emails, but looking at dmc, > it looks like it's updated! Don't know why I missed that email, maybe I > glossed over it... > > But here's the kicker :) Building DMC is impossible (partly because its > closed source, and partly because it requires obscure tools you can no > longer obtain). > > So we still have to wait for a release of DMC (or for D's version of > snn.lib to be updated to include the fix). >
Ahh, fantastic, so progress has been made, and it sounds like it's nearly ready :) > Specifically, the issue is with pipes and EOF. Since everything in D uses > FILE *, so does the new std.process (not the best choice IMO, but we have > no choices in this (yet) ). But DMC's FILE * treats an EPIPE error as a > EBADF, meaning the FILE* sets its error flag vs the EOF flag. > > This means for instance, if you piped off a process to transform a file, > and read it's stdout to completion, std.stdio.File would throw an > exception. > > The fix checks for the specific error and translates it to EOF. It's > somewhat of a hack, but it works. > Interesting, thanks. > If you are interested, I have a patched snn.lib with the fix in place if > you want to try out the new version of std.process. Send me an email. > Sent
