dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz There is always something I broke or overlooked, so let's not make an announcement yet until this is good to go. The web site needs updating, too.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz There is always something I broke or overlooked, so let's not make an announcement yet until this is good to go. The web site needs updating, too. Still no dmd.conf or 64bit binaries for FreeBSD. Based on the time you sent this I'm guessing you failed to include my recent pull requests for the documentation which Kenji merged, see: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/CAFDvkctqW-QDsGLA+Y6z67O686J1W0si2ZeBBF=b05armwn...@mail.gmail.com -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:35:26 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz Another 5 months waiting? http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11365
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz There is always something I broke or overlooked, so let's not make an announcement yet until this is good to go. The web site needs updating, too. You might want to name the release candidates properly and uniquely, just as you started to do with the betas. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz There is always something I broke or overlooked, so let's not make an announcement yet until this is good to go. The web site needs updating, too. dmd.2.064.dmg and dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz are missing. The naming scheme is inconsistent. I don't know if they follow a platform specific naming scheme. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:03:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz There is always something I broke or overlooked, so let's not make an announcement yet until this is good to go. The web site needs updating, too. I still have a closure bug. Dustmite is running on it right now.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:03:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz There is always something I broke or overlooked, so let's not make an announcement yet until this is good to go. The web site needs updating, too. FreeBSD libphobos2.a not updated in 2.064 betas (and now in the release candidate, too): http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11413 I don't have a FreeBSD system to test whether anything actually works, but a 23M half-year-old standard library file in the zip-archive looks just plain wrong. No library updates since February?..
Mono-D v0.5.4.7 - Refactoring issue fixes completion fixes
Hi everyone, not a big release, just a small bump for Mono-D and D_Parser :-) http://mono-d.alexanderbothe.com/internal-refactoring-feature-cleanup-completion-fixes-v0-5-4-7/ Completion issues: https://github.com/aBothe/D_Parser/issues Other issues: https://github.com/aBothe/Mono-D/issues Cheers, Alex
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 12:42 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: dmd.2.064.dmg There now. and dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz are missing. Seems to no longer be in 2.064. The installer builder was changed. The naming scheme is inconsistent. I don't know if they follow a platform specific naming scheme. They don't, but they've followed this pattern since they were originally created by Jordi, and I've left it as is.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 12:34 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: Based on the time you sent this I'm guessing you failed to include my recent pull requests for the documentation which Kenji merged, see: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/CAFDvkctqW-QDsGLA+Y6z67O686J1W0si2ZeBBF=b05armwn...@mail.gmail.com Kenji merged them after I started building the RC. I'll put them in the next RC.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 12:35 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: You might want to name the release candidates properly and uniquely, just as you started to do with the betas. It'll follow the 2.063 pattern.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 12:34 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: Still no dmd.conf or 64bit binaries for FreeBSD. They'll be dropped from the zip file. I don't have the equipment to build them at the moment.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 2013-11-04 11:52, Walter Bright wrote: There now. Thanks. They don't, but they've followed this pattern since they were originally created by Jordi, and I've left it as is. Too bad. I guess you don't want to change that? -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 2013-11-04 11:58, Walter Bright wrote: They'll be dropped from the zip file. I don't have the equipment to build them at the moment. Will FreeBSD be dropped? We never have had 64bit binaries but the 32bit? Can't you just setup a virtual machine? -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 10:53:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: and dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz are missing. Seems to no longer be in 2.064. The installer builder was changed. I have asked Jordi to remove those some time ago to avoid confusion with official Arch packages as matching build script was very obsolete and did not conform packaging guidelines. If having an easily available beta/rc package is desired, it can be trivially added to AUR.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
Walter Bright, el 4 de November a las 02:57 me escribiste: On 11/4/2013 12:35 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: You might want to name the release candidates properly and uniquely, just as you started to do with the betas. It'll follow the 2.063 pattern. You mean after this release it will be named 2.064.1, etc? Then don't call it a release candidate, is confusing. If is really an rc (which since you don't want to make an official announcement yet, I guess it is), please do what you did with the betas. All the same reasons to name the betas uniquely apply to release candidates. Just change beta1 with rc1 and make everybody happy. Is just one more little step! :) Please, please, please, never, ever overwrite released packages (betas and rc included) with a new one. You should consider them read-only after you create and publish them. Then be consistent with how you announce the releases (beta, rc, final) and the version numbers you are using. Thanks! -- Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/ -- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) -- SEÑOR BIELSA: CON TODO RESPETO ¿USTED LO VE JUGAR A RIQUELME? -- Crónica TV
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 13:09:10 UTC, Leandro Lucarella wrote: eles, el 4 de November a las 09:37 me escribiste: On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:35:26 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote: Is sad Yes , but it makes sense, this is a new feature that wasn't even merged or properly tested yet Just to note that this looks quite promising: http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/pull-history.ghtml?projectid=1repoid=1pullid=2700 (True, tests are not designed for this kind of change...) , so it shouldn't be included at a beta stage. Let's just hope next release won't take that long. Well, I hope. Also for various other compilers using the fronted, smaller gap between releases would make their maintainers' lives easier. A 2-month gap between releases?
Re: Introducing vibe.d!
Hi Sönke, Congratulations for your hard work. One question, How do you think your framework running in development mode where a huge amount of models with many business rules exist. A system under development can be slow, like java where a signature change in the method requires reload of the whole application. Alexandre Riveira On Thursday, 26 April 2012 at 20:46:41 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote: During the last few months, we have been working on a new framework for general I/O and especially for building extremely fast web apps. It combines asynchronous I/O with core.thread's great fibers to build a convenient, blocking API which can handle insane amounts of connections due to the low memory and computational overhead. Some of its key fatures are: - Very fast but no endless callback chains as in node.js and similar frameworks - Concise API that tries to be as efficient and intuitive as possible - Built-in HTTP server and client with support for HTTPS, chunked and compressed transfers, keep-alive connections, Apache-style logging, a reverse-proxy, url routing and more - Jade based HTML/XML template system with compile-time code generation for the fastest dynamic page generation times possible - Built-in support for MongoDB and Redis databases - WebSocket support - Natural Json and Bson handling - A package manager for seemless use of extension libraries See http://vibed.org/ for more information and some example applications (there are some things in the works such as an etherpad clone and an NNTP server). vibe.d is in a working state and enters its first beta-phase now to stabilize the current feature set. After that, a small list of additional features is planned before the 1.0 release. The framework can be downloaded or GIT cloned from http://vibed.org/ and is distributed under the terms of the MIT license. Note that the website including the blog is fully written in vibe and provides the first stress test for the implementation. Regards, Sönke
Re: Introducing vibe.d!
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 16:40:25 UTC, Alexandre Riveira wrote: Hi Sönke, Congratulations for your hard work. One question, How do you think your framework running in development mode where a huge amount of models with many business rules exist. A system under development can be slow, like java where a signature change in the method requires reload of the whole application. Alexandre Riveira Alexandre, Vibe.D now has its own forum, might be a better place to post your question. http://forum.rejectedsoftware.com/groups/rejectedsoftware.vibed/ On Thursday, 26 April 2012 at 20:46:41 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote: During the last few months, we have been working on a new framework for general I/O and especially for building extremely fast web apps. It combines asynchronous I/O with core.thread's great fibers to build a convenient, blocking API which can handle insane amounts of connections due to the low memory and computational overhead. Some of its key fatures are: - Very fast but no endless callback chains as in node.js and similar frameworks - Concise API that tries to be as efficient and intuitive as possible - Built-in HTTP server and client with support for HTTPS, chunked and compressed transfers, keep-alive connections, Apache-style logging, a reverse-proxy, url routing and more - Jade based HTML/XML template system with compile-time code generation for the fastest dynamic page generation times possible - Built-in support for MongoDB and Redis databases - WebSocket support - Natural Json and Bson handling - A package manager for seemless use of extension libraries See http://vibed.org/ for more information and some example applications (there are some things in the works such as an etherpad clone and an NNTP server). vibe.d is in a working state and enters its first beta-phase now to stabilize the current feature set. After that, a small list of additional features is planned before the 1.0 release. The framework can be downloaded or GIT cloned from http://vibed.org/ and is distributed under the terms of the MIT license. Note that the website including the blog is fully written in vibe and provides the first stress test for the implementation. Regards, Sönke
Re: Introducing vibe.d!
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 16:40:25 UTC, Alexandre Riveira wrote: Hi Sönke, Congratulations for your hard work. One question, How do you think your framework running in development mode where a huge amount of models with many business rules exist. A system under development can be slow, like java where a signature change in the method requires reload of the whole application. Alexandre Riveira I might recommend to wait a bit before trying it in production until CI suite is figured out (it is work in progress), there are some concerns with stability/regressions right now because it grows just too fast. Once this stuff is back under control though, there is no reason why it shouldn't scale to complex business logic scenarios. It may require writing own modules for something like XML-based configuration or similar Java-ish stuff as vibe.d itself is more declarative / procedural in style but foundation is pretty solid. I also recommend asking more specific questions in vibe.d own newsgroup as Sonke pays more attention to it, he is obviously quite a busy guy :)
Re: Programming in D book is about 95% translated
On 11/03/2013 11:06 PM, Rory McGuire wrote: Any chance of you providing a limited edition printed version? Perhaps with the authors name missing from the cover? :D Ha ha! :) Maybe the name should appear randomly on the web site. Seriously, I am thinking about a printed version, likely self-published, but not before another couple of months. Ali
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 4:19 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-11-04 11:52, Walter Bright wrote: They don't, but they've followed this pattern since they were originally created by Jordi, and I've left it as is. Too bad. I guess you don't want to change that? I don't like breaking my scripts and other peoples' scripts. It's annoying that they don't follow a proper pattern, but is not a big deal. If someone wants to step up and take the mantle of Build Master, he'd be in charge of things like that.
Re: Programming in D book is about 95% translated
On 4 Nov 2013 19:45, Ali Çehreli acehr...@yahoo.com wrote: On 11/03/2013 11:06 PM, Rory McGuire wrote: Any chance of you providing a limited edition printed version? Perhaps with the authors name missing from the cover? :D Ha ha! :) Maybe the name should appear randomly on the web site. Seriously, I am thinking about a printed version, likely self-published, but not before another couple of months. Ali I look forward to it. I'm thinking a book with author missing on front cover and picture done by relative in lower right corner :D.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 04.11.2013 19:16, Alvaro wrote: On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:03:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip [...] dmd -m64 xx.d says: Can't run '\bin\link.exe', check PATH Was that supposed to work? (as there are files in lib64 I thought it was ready) 32 bit is OK. If you are installing from the zip file, you need to have VCINSTALLDIR and WindowsSdkDir environment variables set. These are set if you open the console window for the Visual Studio version you want to use. These settings were hardcoded in sc.ini to the default installation path of VS2010 in previous dmd releases, but stripping the drive name. The windows installer will patch sc.ini to contain the paths of the most recent versions of VC and the Windows SDK. Walter, can you also add the Windows installer to the RC?
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:03:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip [...] dmd -m64 xx.d says: Can't run '\bin\link.exe', check PATH Was that supposed to work? (as there are files in lib64 I thought it was ready) 32 bit is OK.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 10:20 AM, Jordi Sayol wrote: On 04/11/13 19:04, Walter Bright wrote: On 11/4/2013 4:19 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-11-04 11:52, Walter Bright wrote: They don't, but they've followed this pattern since they were originally created by Jordi, and I've left it as is. Too bad. I guess you don't want to change that? I don't like breaking my scripts and other peoples' scripts. It's annoying that they don't follow a proper pattern, but is not a big deal. If someone wants to step up and take the mantle of Build Master, he'd be in charge of things like that. Sorry. I forget to tell you. my fault. No worries. It's a minor detail.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 10:43 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote: Walter, can you also add the Windows installer to the RC? What exactly do you mean?
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 2013-11-04 20:19, Walter Bright wrote: On 11/4/2013 10:43 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote: Walter, can you also add the Windows installer to the RC? What exactly do you mean? You posted links to installers for all platforms except for Windows. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 2013-11-04 19:01, Walter Bright wrote: Absolutely not. We just don't have a download package for it (this is not a new development). There are binaries for FreeBSD 32bit, but the dmd.conf file is still missing. I've had a virtual machine setup at one point, but those things require significant time to set up and to keep them from breaking (my virtual machine setups all broke when I upgraded Ubuntu). Personally I don't think it takes up so much time to setup, especially not for D development. Just keep the customizations and non-default packages to a minimum. What I'd like is someone to become the build master who will get Brad's autotester to automatically and routinely build each platform install package. This will also have the effect of better dealing with the constant breakage of the scripts that build those packages. Yeah, that would be nice. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 11:30 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-11-04 19:01, Walter Bright wrote: Absolutely not. We just don't have a download package for it (this is not a new development). There are binaries for FreeBSD 32bit, but the dmd.conf file is still missing. The libraries were not built correctly (my old machine runs out of memory building them). FreeBSD users have needed to, for some time now, fork/build to get it. I've had a virtual machine setup at one point, but those things require significant time to set up and to keep them from breaking (my virtual machine setups all broke when I upgraded Ubuntu). Personally I don't think it takes up so much time to setup, especially not for D development. Just keep the customizations and non-default packages to a minimum. Heck, I had spent considerable time just trying to figure out *which* virtual box to install. Each option came with a long list of caveats and things that didn't work. Some would work with one OS, some with another, the one I did download would kinda sorta work with NetBSD, but not really, etc. Then, of course, was having it all wiped out by upgrading Ubuntu. It's not impossible to do. There's just a significant time sink involved in figuring out which one to get, getting it installed, getting it working, and keeping it working. It's actually easier to just buy another machine.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 11:32 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-11-04 20:19, Walter Bright wrote: On 11/4/2013 10:43 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote: Walter, can you also add the Windows installer to the RC? What exactly do you mean? You posted links to installers for all platforms except for Windows. Ah, I see. I'd overlooked that one. I thought Rainer meant he wanted me to cherry-pick some installer pull into 2.064.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 12:03 AM, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm Windows: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.exe
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 04.11.2013 21:06, Walter Bright wrote: On 11/4/2013 12:03 AM, Walter Bright wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm Windows: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.exe Thanks. The Visual D installation is missing from this installer. Obviously, https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/installer/pull/23 has never been merged. As I've just released a new version, it would be nice if it could link to the new 0.3.37.
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/2013 2:47 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote: Thanks. The Visual D installation is missing from this installer. Obviously, https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/installer/pull/23 has never been merged. As I've just released a new version, it would be nice if it could link to the new 0.3.37. There have been a blizzard of pulls done in the last couple weeks, and it isn't always clear to me which ones should go in 2.064. A note to me would be helpful with this. Also, is that pull enough, or are you suggesting it needs further modification?
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 11/4/13 5:20 PM, Walter Bright wrote: On 11/4/2013 2:47 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote: Thanks. The Visual D installation is missing from this installer. Obviously, https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/installer/pull/23 has never been merged. As I've just released a new version, it would be nice if it could link to the new 0.3.37. There have been a blizzard of pulls done in the last couple weeks, and it isn't always clear to me which ones should go in 2.064. A note to me would be helpful with this. Also, is that pull enough, or are you suggesting it needs further modification? Why use lossy emails? Submit pull requests against the branch (with a pointer in the request to the associated master pull to help confirm that it's already been merged there first). That way it'll both get tested appropriately and not lost in the shuffle.
Re: Visual D 0.3.37 released
Thanks so much. As I've said before, this is an absolutely critical, yet often overlooked piece of the ecosystem. Good to see plenty of life in the project! :) Note: I saw Alexander Bothe released an update to the parser one day after your release... ;) On 3 November 2013 00:40, Rainer Schuetze r.sagita...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, it's been a long time since the last release of Visual D, but I hope it wasn't too long. As Visual D moves closer to the dlang.org website, this is the final release that will be available on http://www.dsource.org/ projects/visuald. Downloads and documentation are also available at http://rainers.github.io/visuald. Major changes include * Installer now supports VS 2013, updated to cv2pdb 0.27, mago 0.8, fixes x64 debugger in VS 2012 Shell * improvements to Compile and Run * improvements to syntax/coverage highlighting * DParser engine now used by default, updated to recent version * single file options now available per project configuration * added global option to display the reason for building a target * added different options for executable and library search paths to be used for Win32/x64 * link dependencies can now also be monitored for the 32-bit MS linker * added commands Collapse unittests and Collapse disabled to the outlining menu The full list of changes can be found here: http://www.dsource.org/projects/visuald/wiki/VersionHistory or: http://rainers.github.io/visuald/visuald/VersionHistory.html Visual D is written in D, source code is available here: https://github.com/D-programming-Language/visuald Best, Rainer
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 4 November 2013 08:03, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_i386.deb http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-i386.pkg.tar.xz http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz There is always something I broke or overlooked, so let's not make an announcement yet until this is good to go. The web site needs updating, too. For the second time, the license on the readme.txt distributed with the sources is wrong? -- Iain Buclaw *(p e ? p++ : p) = (c 0x0f) + '0';
Re: dmd 2.064 release candidate 1
On 2013-11-04 21:01, Walter Bright wrote: The libraries were not built correctly (my old machine runs out of memory building them). FreeBSD users have needed to, for some time now, fork/build to get it. I don't understand, the binaries and Phobos are included in the zip (I haven't verified that they work). But dmd.conf is not. Can't you include dmd.conf just because your machine runs out of memory? Heck, I had spent considerable time just trying to figure out *which* virtual box to install. Each option came with a long list of caveats and things that didn't work. Some would work with one OS, some with another, the one I did download would kinda sorta work with NetBSD, but not really, etc. Then, of course, was having it all wiped out by upgrading Ubuntu. I'm not sure I understand what you're meaning. If I want to install Ubuntu, I just create a new virtual machine (using VirtualBox), download Ubuntu and makes a default installation. If I want Fedora, I do the same thing but I download and install Fedora instead. NetBSD? We don't even support NetBSD. For FreeBSD, just do the same thing, download FreeBSD. Actually, for FreeBSD I installed PC-BSD instead. That will include a GUI by default, making it basically just as easy to use as Ubuntu. The only thing that I had some trouble with is cross-compiling. That is, building 32bit on a 64bit machine. It's not impossible to do. There's just a significant time sink involved in figuring out which one to get, getting it installed, getting it working, and keeping it working. It's actually easier to just buy another machine. I'm not going to argue. If you have trouble picking which ISO image to download we can help you. What's taking the most time for me is download the ISO and wait for the installation. But I can do other things while waiting. -- /Jacob Carlborg
