Re: dmd 2.064.2
On Wednesday, 6 November 2013 at 19:57:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 11/6/2013 4:34 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote: Also I find strange that the first patchlevel version is 2 and not 1. Was that intended or just an error? It was intended. I felt that 2.064 = 2.064.1 would have been confusing, hence 2.064 = 2.064.2 But were there 2.064 and 2.064.1 releases? If I'm not mistaken the last release was 2.063.2 (at least judging by the website), next major release should be 2.064, not 2.064.1 or 2.064.2 (those are patch releases, not major ones). If 2.064.1 was a RC then it was badly named. As IMHO RC versions must be marked with rc, as betas are marked with b flag. Something like 2.064-rc.1, 2.064-rc.2, ... 2.064 (stable/major release), 2.064.1 (patch release), ... This (-rc.xx) is how RC versions should be marked as per SEMVER standard (http://semver.org), although I know that D doesn't follow semantic versioning as defined in that standard. Other than this thing with versioning I must say that I'm very pleased with changes in this version, so congrats to all people involved! :)
Re: An idea - make dlang.org a fundation
On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 20:09:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-06-25 06:34, QAston wrote: ---Get a real webdesigner involved I would say, as long as the web site is written in ddoc, no real web designer will be interested. There is no need for designer to know what DDOC is. For the past few years I have worked with many designers which had only basic knowledge about HTML and even less about CSS (most of them don't know anything about JavaScript but they know jQuery a bit). They just give me PSD and I do slicing and all coding. So if any redesign of dlang.org is going to happen I volunteer to do all coding, so there is no need to look for designer which is comfortable writing DDOC.
Re: DMD 2.063.2 now up
On Tuesday, 18 June 2013 at 08:41:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: and fixes several reported regressions. download.dlang.org Great news! Luckily I wasn't hit by any regression but I'm glad to see that those are fixed promptly. btw download.dlang.org is not working, is that a new location for downloads and DNS changes have not been propagated yet or you made a typo? :) dlang.org/download.html still works so this is a non-issue.
Re: vibe.d 0.7.12 released
On Monday, 11 February 2013 at 19:08:16 UTC, FG wrote: Great project -- a flagship example of D's real world application! On 2013-02-11 19:11, Ali Çehreli wrote: same code as Python, translated to D. Of course, the solution that use vibe.d does not have Python's infamous GIL; instead, it comes with parallelism and concurrency out of the box. And you are aware of typos in your code even before running your program. ;) Running worker processes can make the GIL problem a little less of a PITA, but having the typos pointed out before running the app... is just priceless. :) I'm struggling with the temptation to move a Python website to vibe.d. What keeps me from doing that are Django templates. Not even because vibe's templates have to be recompiled each time some small markup change is introduced -- I got used to that with LaTeX ;) -- but because of Jade. It's way too far off course from HTML for my tastes. I see no reason for inventing a completely new format when all you need is templating. So let me use this opportunity to ask you: is somebody working on other template systems for vibe.d already or shall I get involved myself? I'm thinking about something similar to this, syntax-wise: http://jinja.pocoo.org/ I'm working on porting Twig (http://twig.sensiolabs.org/) to D (so I can use it with vibe.d) but I'm still far even from a preview release.. I'm hoping to have more spare time in upcoming months to implement at least small usable subset of Twig features. I will post in this forum/NG once I have something to show..
