Re: Release D 2.082.0
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 15:33:09 UTC, Laurent Tréguier wrote: On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:42:41 UTC, lurker wrote: after the beta i tried it again - just to be fair. 1.) install d, install visual d. 2.)trying to to look at options under visual d without a project crashes VS2017 - latest service pack. 3.)VS2017 - displays a problem on startup 4.)creating the dummy project - compile for x64. error something is missing. 5.) deinstall everything and wait for another year this crap does not even work out of the box - what else is not tested in D? With the Windows SDK, the Windows Universal C Runtime and the VC++ v14.15 installed with Visual Studio Installer, I can compile for x64. What does it say is missing ? if i remember correctly (5.), it wants a different/other version of the tool chain. never the less, i'll continue using c# and not install (1.) again, since in earlier versions of D i eventually had to deinstall VS2017 and then reinstall it fresh. too much work. btw, 1. was the only plugin i had.
Re: Release D 2.082.0
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:16:40 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote: On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:05:10 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.082.0. The Windows installer gave me no warning messages this time. Thanks, everyone. Mike after the beta i tried it again - just to be fair. 1.) install d, install visual d. 2.)trying to to look at options under visual d without a project crashes VS2017 - latest service pack. 3.)VS2017 - displays a problem on startup 4.)creating the dummy project - compile for x64. error something is missing. 5.) deinstall everything and wait for another year this crap does not even work out of the box - what else is not tested in D?
Re: reduxed - Redux for D
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 03:47:03 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote: I tried to find my forum posts on this but the post is so old I couldn't find it in search. You mean this? https://forum.dlang.org/thread/ibwazxrngcsrfolgb...@forum.dlang.org
Re: [GSoC] std.experimental.xml is now a PR!
On Wednesday, 24 August 2016 at 09:31:44 UTC, Lodovico Giaretta wrote: Hi! I'm pleased to announce that my GSoC project, a replacement for the outdated std.xml, is now a Phobos PR! [1] It is an (almost complete) mirror of my repository [2], which is also available on DUB [3]. I would like to thank my mentor Robert burner Schadek for his great support and everybody who already gave some feedback during these months. The PR is not meant for immediate merging. Some things still need improvement (docs/unittests/...) while others will come in a second iteration (advanced DTD handling). It is meant to for some reviews, focusing mainly on the design and usability of the library. In the PR description you will find all the details, including a nice "wishlist" of things that I found missing in D during the development and some open questions. So, if you have any consideration/suggestion, drop a line here or on the PR, and if you find bugs, don't hesitate to file an issue on the issue tracker of my repository. Thank you very much! [1] https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/4741 [2] https://github.com/lodo1995/experimental.xml [3] https://code.dlang.org/packages/std-experimental-xml Looks good at first glance. How does it compare against established XML parsers performance-wise, e.g. Phobos XML, RapidXML, pugixml etc. Tango claimed to be the fastest XML parser at some point in time, curious how it compares. http://xmlbench.sourceforge.net/ might be a good start.
Re: Obama endorses D
dsimcha Wrote: == Quote from Walter Bright (newshou...@digitalmars.com)'s article Obama: You want to go forward, what do you do? You put it in D. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/08/obamas-latest-joke-republicans.html This one makes me laugh especially because there's actually an R programming language that I occasionally have to use, and I generally hate it. It's basically a domain specific language for statistics and not well-known outside the statistics community. The biggest problem with it is poor documentation of basic things like builtin data structures. D's documentation looks great in comparison. The other one is that it's too high-level, domain specific and slow (even compared to other interpreted languages) to be easy to think of as a real programming language. At the same time it's too low-level and lacking in simple (i.e. GUI or single command) ways to do simple things to be easy to think of as a plain old application. Basically, you have to program to use it, but when you try, if you're used to real languages you feel like you're programming with 8 of your fingers crushed. Sounds a lot like matlab.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
So far I've been just lurking here, but these are my 5 cents. I think the library situation is terrible. It's not for the good of D. We should just simple ditch Tango. It's D 1.0 only and always causing trouble. We absolutely need support from professionals and enterprises. D is growing fast. The need for attribution is just intolerable, we need brown tongue attitude to lure in the big money. Would a professional use BSD? I agree Boost has very high quality and they might not even notice/care if we steal from them. I totally agree with the convincing arguments I found from the mailing list: Now I'm glad I never looked at Tango. I don't empathize with the Tango fellows keeping their precious locked because it's very difficult to frame that action as having D's community interest at heart. To be frank their whole motivation looks petty and political to the extreme, particularly because it's not a rocket science library. I think for practical reasons we should simply stay away from Tango. We'd be wasting time otherwise. It's not like they discovered the cure for cancer.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
FeepingCreature Wrote: Phobos1 is shit. The Tango devs know this, the Phobos devs know it. Anyone who denies it has never compared the Phobos and Tango sourcecode. It's impossible to verify those claims because reading the Tango source might taint one's mind and after that one wouldn't be allowed to contribute any code to Phobos anymore. Your simple solution is never gonna happen. You're not freaking Alexander the Great, cutting the Gordian Knot. The way D2 is going is the best solution for both sides, imho; but _anything_ that prevents Tango/Phobos interop in D2, or pushes away Tango devs, or pushes away Phobos devs - should be treated as a *severe* threat to the future of the language. We *absolutely need* to present a unified front in D2. We fucked this up once already; let's not repeat that experience. The Tango developers could have handed over all copyrights to Walter or Phobos. This would solve the licensing problems if anything needs to change later. Many open source projects such as MySQL do this. Instead they yearned the attribution. Which one is more important, personal fame or potential solid enterprise support? If the library isn't rocket science or doesn't cure the cancer, what value does the attribution have then? The new Phobos licensing is altruistic, it reflects the modest mentality of the contributors.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
== Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article FeepingCreature wrote: The quality-of-code metric seems to be universally acknowledged - after all, druntime itself is a fork of tango core. We think you suck, so we'll base our new standard library on your work. You seem to be unaware of the history, and this may be leading you to misunderstand the situation. Sean Kelly wrote Ares as a replacement for Phobos. Tango began as a merger of Ares with Mango. Tango core is Ares. Druntime is also Ares. The primary author has never changed, and it's an unbroken continuation of development on a single code base. Ditto with tango.math, (which was written by me, originally in a project called 'mathextra'). Thank you Sean Kelly, Don and Steve Schveiguy for leaving Tango and coming to Phobos. It means very much for everybody.
