Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 21:41:13 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote: On 8/23/14, 3:33 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 8/22/14, 10:05 AM, John Colvin wrote: As I'm sure has been mentioned elsewhere, the website changes should be part of the release process, not an afterthought. Agreed. Who would like to volunteer being our webmaster? We'll discuss with our admin to give push rights. -- Andrei As I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread, I need access. I did the update for every beta/RC. This one was not an oversight, I intentionally did not update the page. Given the right to push the update, I will, But I'm not going to sit around creating pull requests for one a line delete or one character edit and the wait 24hour+ for it to be published before I can proceed with what I'm doing. Then again, if that's required is a cronjob as Brad has suggested, then I guess the problem is solved. I was waiting few days for someone to update the main page before I lost patience and created the pull-request. Even worse - it was not accepted until I explicitly asked Andrej to merge it on IRC... This said I am afraid I will have to agree with conclusion that our release manager will have to push the change of the main page with updated details, after each release.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 08:23:39 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote: It works for ddmd's array.d/array.h at least, although it's not very maintenance friendly. I assume you're aiming for something like a 'core.stdcpp.vector' with an implementation to match each stl implementation? What's the motivation for embedding these things in the d runtime? Wouldn't it be better to have a libc_d instead of core.stdc, libcpp_d instead of core.stdcpp, liblinux_d instead of core.sys.linux, etc...? I thought the D runtime was supposed to be simply an implementation of the language features, but it appears its scope is much more broad. This makes the language coupled to those platforms and less general purpose like C and C++. Mike
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Walter Bright wrote in message news:lt7tan$24ei$1...@digitalmars.com... 1. I hate writing documentation. I really really hate it. Join the club :-) =) Sorry you got to be the pioneer with the arrows in your back, but you've paved the way for the rest of us. I don't really mind, for some reason I enjoy tracking down wrong-code bugs. I just don't want everyone to think it'll be easy to plug in their favourite C++ library.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Kagamin wrote in message news:ujtkjzyvjhtvmcvjh...@forum.dlang.org... On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 08:18:18 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote: 2. These features are rather difficult to use, and I don't want people to think they can just plug-and-play. I've spent a lot of time fighting compiler alignment bugs, which are their own special kind of hell. Many of those issues have been resolved now, but only in the areas that ddmd actually exercises. Do you suggest that C++ interfaces should be written by the compiler team? I'm just saying you need a fairly good knowledge of the low-level workings on C++ and D, especially if something goes wrong. One example I hit, is that on windows if you had overloaded virtual functions, they would be inserted into the vtable backwards. These parts of the compiler are not very well tested, so if you're not comfortable debugging this sort of thing it might be better to wait until extern(C++) has seen heavier use.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Jonathan M Davis wrote in message news:fxdqpmfcbskvtcafz...@forum.dlang.org... LOL. Yeah, well, it would be ni going to support C+ce if we could get an actual list of the C++ features that D currently supports somewhere (and how to use them if it's not obvious). You've been doing so much great work on that that I have no clue what the current state of things is. For instance, this is the first I've heard of anything about template support; I'd thought that we were never going to support templates. Is it just for name mangling or for actually compiling them? Templates are sort-of supported. The main motivation was to allow dmd's ArrayT type to be used in function signatures. This is nice, because it only requires correct name mangling, you don't need to worry about instantiation. Being able to call templated free functions and call methods on templated types will require each referenced template to be explicitly instantiated on the C++ side. I don't think it's realistic for D to do this automatically, although it is possible to do things like generate a non-templated forwarding wrapper function for each instantiation. In DDMD, this is worked around by array.d containing a functionally-equivalent translation of array.h. The D code all ends up calling the D version, and the two must be kept exactly in sync. This approach is probably feasible for accessing stl types and other common, rarely changing C++ templates. There are two reason it's not better documented: 1. I hate writing documentation. I really really hate it. 2. These features are rather difficult to use, and I don't want people to think they can just plug-and-play. I've spent a lot of time fighting compiler alignment bugs, which are their own special kind of hell. Many of those issues have been resolved now, but only in the areas that ddmd actually exercises.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Walter Bright wrote in message news:lt5l3k$2s5t$1...@digitalmars.com... The thing is, while the code was there, there wasn't a single test case for it in the test suite. Furthermore, at least for Elf, there was no support for the special mangling done for ::std:: stuff. Yeah, I don't know what happened to the test cases for template mangling. They were certainly tested when the new manger was being introduced, but somehow disappeared. There was no special std mangling because at the time C++ mangling was updated, there were no C++ namespaces in D. The thing is, modern C++ practice makes heavy use of std types. Having an interface to C++ code is fairly unusable unless D can also interface to std::string, std::vector, and a few others. The first step is to support the mangling of them. Then, try to construct a workalike on the D side that follows D rules, and yet is able to seamlessly interact with the corresponding C++ code. We'll see how far we can get with that, and then evaluate what to do next. It works for ddmd's array.d/array.h at least, although it's not very maintenance friendly. I assume you're aiming for something like a 'core.stdcpp.vector' with an implementation to match each stl implementation?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 20:49:48 UTC, bachmeier wrote: It would be nice to have a page to link to when questions come up on Reddit about compatibility with C++. We have this: http://dlang.org/cpp_interface.html From what I understand, it's not complete. For example it says that non-virtual and static member functions cannot be accesses, but that's not the case anymore, AFAIR. And the section about templates also says that there's no support. That page should also have information about avoiding the garbage collector and the status of GC removal from the standard library. This information is currently spread over several articles with a different focus each, and not up to date either: http://dlang.org/garbage.html http://wiki.dlang.org/Instantiating_Class_Objects_Elsewhere_Than_the_GC_Heap http://wiki.dlang.org/Memory_Management http://wiki.dlang.org/Versus_the_garbage_collector I don't think we should treat both topics on the same page, they're mostly unrelated (though people coming from C++ might be interested in both, of course).
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:00:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 Andrei Main dlang.org page still shows that 2.066 is in beta phase. Merge the https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/638 to fix.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 08:23:16 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote: On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 20:49:48 UTC, bachmeier wrote: It would be nice to have a page to link to when questions come up on Reddit about compatibility with C++. We have this: http://dlang.org/cpp_interface.html From what I understand, it's not complete. For example it says that non-virtual and static member functions cannot be accesses, but that's not the case anymore, AFAIR. And the section about templates also says that there's no support. That's the problem. We don't want to link to a page that's not accurate when replying to comments on Reddit. That page should also have information about avoiding the garbage collector and the status of GC removal from the standard library. This information is currently spread over several articles with a different focus each, and not up to date either: http://dlang.org/garbage.html http://wiki.dlang.org/Instantiating_Class_Objects_Elsewhere_Than_the_GC_Heap http://wiki.dlang.org/Memory_Management http://wiki.dlang.org/Versus_the_garbage_collector I don't think we should treat both topics on the same page, they're mostly unrelated (though people coming from C++ might be interested in both, of course). Maybe it wouldn't have to go on the same page, but at least links to all the information should appear on the same page. The current system with everything scattered here and there makes for a bad first impression.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/22/14, 2:06 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:00:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 Andrei Main dlang.org page still shows that 2.066 is in beta phase. Merge the https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/638 to fix. Pushed, thanks Dejan. -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/22/2014 1:23 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote: Walter Bright wrote in message news:lt5l3k$2s5t$1...@digitalmars.com... The thing is, while the code was there, there wasn't a single test case for it in the test suite. Furthermore, at least for Elf, there was no support for the special mangling done for ::std:: stuff. Yeah, I don't know what happened to the test cases for template mangling. They were certainly tested when the new manger was being introduced, but somehow disappeared. Yeah, that can happen. There was no special std mangling because at the time C++ mangling was updated, there were no C++ namespaces in D. Makes sense. I assume you're aiming for something like a 'core.stdcpp.vector' with an implementation to match each stl implementation? Yes. While it'll be a significant effort to do this, it could be a big win for us.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 14:36:13 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 8/22/14, 2:06 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:00:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 Andrei Main dlang.org page still shows that 2.066 is in beta phase. Merge the https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/638 to fix. Pushed, thanks Dejan. -- Andrei As I'm sure has been mentioned elsewhere, the website changes should be part of the release process, not an afterthought.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/22/2014 1:18 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote: There are two reason it's not better documented: 1. I hate writing documentation. I really really hate it. Join the club :-) 2. These features are rather difficult to use, and I don't want people to think they can just plug-and-play. I've spent a lot of time fighting compiler alignment bugs, which are their own special kind of hell. Many of those issues have been resolved now, but only in the areas that ddmd actually exercises. Sorry you got to be the pioneer with the arrows in your back, but you've paved the way for the rest of us.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/22/14, 10:04 AM, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/22/2014 1:23 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote: I assume you're aiming for something like a 'core.stdcpp.vector' with an implementation to match each stl implementation? Yes. While it'll be a significant effort to do this, it could be a big win for us. This is top priority for D. Above top if possible. -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/22/14, 10:05 AM, John Colvin wrote: As I'm sure has been mentioned elsewhere, the website changes should be part of the release process, not an afterthought. Agreed. Who would like to volunteer being our webmaster? We'll discuss with our admin to give push rights. -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 17:06:31 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/22/2014 1:18 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote: There are two reason it's not better documented: 1. I hate writing documentation. I really really hate it. Join the club :-) 2. These features are rather difficult to use, and I don't want people to think they can just plug-and-play. I've spent a lot of time fighting compiler alignment bugs, which are their own special kind of hell. Many of those issues have been resolved now, but only in the areas that ddmd actually exercises. Sorry you got to be the pioneer with the arrows in your back, but you've paved the way for the rest of us. LOL! That's a hilarious comment! :)
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/22/2014 11:33 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On 8/22/14, 10:05 AM, John Colvin wrote: As I'm sure has been mentioned elsewhere, the website changes should be part of the release process, not an afterthought. Agreed. Who would like to volunteer being our webmaster? We'll discuss with our admin to give push rights. -- Andrei cronjob that does a git pull, and then everyone with pull permissions can keep the website updated.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 08:18:18 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote: 2. These features are rather difficult to use, and I don't want people to think they can just plug-and-play. I've spent a lot of time fighting compiler alignment bugs, which are their own special kind of hell. Many of those issues have been resolved now, but only in the areas that ddmd actually exercises. Do you suggest that C++ interfaces should be written by the compiler team?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/23/14, 3:33 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 8/22/14, 10:05 AM, John Colvin wrote: As I'm sure has been mentioned elsewhere, the website changes should be part of the release process, not an afterthought. Agreed. Who would like to volunteer being our webmaster? We'll discuss with our admin to give push rights. -- Andrei As I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread, I need access. I did the update for every beta/RC. This one was not an oversight, I intentionally did not update the page. Given the right to push the update, I will, But I'm not going to sit around creating pull requests for one a line delete or one character edit and the wait 24hour+ for it to be published before I can proceed with what I'm doing. Then again, if that's required is a cronjob as Brad has suggested, then I guess the problem is solved.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 01:30:52 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:18:09 -0700 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: What is it that we could help with? -- Andrei he's drama queen, he doesn't need any help, only attention. Just let's try to be less harsher. Even if that's true, being harsh would be of no good for that person and for us neither.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 20/08/14 18:57, Brad Anderson wrote: Anything specific you have problems with? Syntax changes aren't all that common these days Support for C++ namespaces where just released and support for C++ templates will most likely end up in master soon. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Jacob Carlborg wrote in message news:lt43pj$ral$1...@digitalmars.com... Support for C++ namespaces where just released and support for C++ templates will most likely end up in master soon. Support for C++ templates was in the last release, and the new pull request is only for special mangling of some stl declarations.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 16:25:04 UTC, disapointed user wrote: too bad that i wasted my time for such a long time. i post a link to that thread with your answer to everywhere i can, so that others won't waste their time too. anyway good luck in the future for you linux guys. Well, people have different perspectives :) see http://forum.dlang.org/post/lrsnjovurigezboqx...@forum.dlang.org
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 21/08/14 12:10, Daniel Murphy wrote: Support for C++ templates was in the last release, and the new pull request is only for special mangling of some stl declarations. You see, I get confused of all the syntax changes ;) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 15:20:49 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote: Jacob Carlborg wrote in message news:lt50m0$20f0$1...@digitalmars.com... Support for C++ templates was in the last release, and the new pull request is only for special mangling of some stl declarations. You see, I get confused of all the syntax changes ;) Don't worry, so did Walter. LOL. Yeah, well, it would be ni going to support C+ce if we could get an actual list of the C++ features that D currently supports somewhere (and how to use them if it's not obvious). You've been doing so much great work on that that I have no clue what the current state of things is. For instance, this is the first I've heard of anything about template support; I'd thought that we were never going to support templates. Is it just for name mangling or for actually compiling them? - Jonathan M Davis
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 08:14:41 UTC, novice2 wrote: http://dlang.org/changelog.html Version D 2.066 August 18, 2014 ... Phobos enhancements 1.Bugzilla 3780: getopt improvements by Igor Lesik Sorry, i can't find this improvements nor in getopt.d nor in http://dlang.org/phobos/std_getopt.html. Is this announce prematurely, and that this changes will be seen in 2.067 ? I suspect that the changelog was done by dates rather than based on what was actually merged. Someone else was commenting that some stuff was in there that's going to be in 2.067 and not 2.066, and 2.066 took long enough after it was branched, that it would be easy to accidentally list 2.067 stuff for 2.066 if you were looking at merge dates rather than what actually went on the 2.066 branch. - Jonathan M Davis
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/21/2014 11:54 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: LOL. Yeah, well, it would be ni going to support C+ce if we could get an actual list of the C++ features that D currently supports somewhere (and how to use them if it's not obvious). You've been doing so much great work on that that I have no clue what the current state of things is. For instance, this is the first I've heard of anything about template support; I'd thought that we were never going to support templates. Is it just for name mangling or for actually compiling them? The thing is, while the code was there, there wasn't a single test case for it in the test suite. Furthermore, at least for Elf, there was no support for the special mangling done for ::std:: stuff. The thing is, modern C++ practice makes heavy use of std types. Having an interface to C++ code is fairly unusable unless D can also interface to std::string, std::vector, and a few others. The first step is to support the mangling of them. Then, try to construct a workalike on the D side that follows D rules, and yet is able to seamlessly interact with the corresponding C++ code. We'll see how far we can get with that, and then evaluate what to do next. There are no plans for actually compiling C++ code with a D compiler. The plan is for support like we do for C - have a .d header file for it.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 20:33:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/21/2014 11:54 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: LOL. Yeah, well, it would be ni going to support C+ce if we could get an actual list of the C++ features that D currently supports somewhere (and how to use them if it's not obvious). You've been doing so much great work on that that I have no clue what the current state of things is. For instance, this is the first I've heard of anything about template support; I'd thought that we were never going to support templates. Is it just for name mangling or for actually compiling them? The thing is, while the code was there, there wasn't a single test case for it in the test suite. Furthermore, at least for Elf, there was no support for the special mangling done for ::std:: stuff. The thing is, modern C++ practice makes heavy use of std types. Having an interface to C++ code is fairly unusable unless D can also interface to std::string, std::vector, and a few others. The first step is to support the mangling of them. Then, try to construct a workalike on the D side that follows D rules, and yet is able to seamlessly interact with the corresponding C++ code. We'll see how far we can get with that, and then evaluate what to do next. There are no plans for actually compiling C++ code with a D compiler. The plan is for support like we do for C - have a .d header file for it. Well, I wouldn't have expected us to be compiling C++ per se, but previously, it seemed like the party line was that we wouldn't be supporting C++ templates at all because of how hard they were and because we don't want a C++ compiler in the D compiler. I'm certainly all for anything we can do for C++ compatability without going off the deep end. I just don't hear much about what we're actually doing right now. So, I really have no idea what the current status of that is. With what was said at dconf and comments like these, it seems like we're making huge progress in comparison to where we were, and as far as I can tell, about the only way to hear about it is to either pay a lot of attention to dmd pulls or to see an occasonal comment from Daniel talking about it or from someone who's paying close attention to what he's up to. So, at some point in the near future, it would be nice if there were somewhere that actually said what D can actually do with C++ now, even if that doesn't include everything that's going to be coming or if much of it is marked as experimental and relatively untested. - Jonathan M Davis
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 20:43:53 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 20:33:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/21/2014 11:54 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: LOL. Yeah, well, it would be ni going to support C+ce if we could get an actual list of the C++ features that D currently supports somewhere (and how to use them if it's not obvious). You've been doing so much great work on that that I have no clue what the current state of things is. For instance, this is the first I've heard of anything about template support; I'd thought that we were never going to support templates. Is it just for name mangling or for actually compiling them? The thing is, while the code was there, there wasn't a single test case for it in the test suite. Furthermore, at least for Elf, there was no support for the special mangling done for ::std:: stuff. The thing is, modern C++ practice makes heavy use of std types. Having an interface to C++ code is fairly unusable unless D can also interface to std::string, std::vector, and a few others. The first step is to support the mangling of them. Then, try to construct a workalike on the D side that follows D rules, and yet is able to seamlessly interact with the corresponding C++ code. We'll see how far we can get with that, and then evaluate what to do next. There are no plans for actually compiling C++ code with a D compiler. The plan is for support like we do for C - have a .d header file for it. Well, I wouldn't have expected us to be compiling C++ per se, but previously, it seemed like the party line was that we wouldn't be supporting C++ templates at all because of how hard they were and because we don't want a C++ compiler in the D compiler. I'm certainly all for anything we can do for C++ compatability without going off the deep end. I just don't hear much about what we're actually doing right now. So, I really have no idea what the current status of that is. With what was said at dconf and comments like these, it seems like we're making huge progress in comparison to where we were, and as far as I can tell, about the only way to hear about it is to either pay a lot of attention to dmd pulls or to see an occasonal comment from Daniel talking about it or from someone who's paying close attention to what he's up to. So, at some point in the near future, it would be nice if there were somewhere that actually said what D can actually do with C++ now, even if that doesn't include everything that's going to be coming or if much of it is marked as experimental and relatively untested. - Jonathan M Davis It would be nice to have a page to link to when questions come up on Reddit about compatibility with C++. That page should also have information about avoiding the garbage collector and the status of GC removal from the standard library.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 20/08/14 03:41, Andrew Edwards wrote: That was my doing... I am preparing myself for the next go around. The actual branch will be created on Sunday (24 Aug) for a Monday (0900 PDT) announcement. The beta cycle will run eight weeks following that. On the fourth week (22 Sept) I will transition from beta to RC. Betas will be release 5 days apart. RCs will be released 3 days apart. If no regression is fixed during that beta/RC window, the window will be extended an additional 3/5 days (as appropriate) until either fixes are received or the review period ends: at which time the final release is prepared and published. The only thing that will extend the review period is if a regression exiting at the time RC1 is released remains open at the end of the 8 weeks. At that time an additional week will be added to the release cycle to address those specific issues. If they cannot be addressed during that additional week, the cycle will be terminated and the final release published. All regressions not addressed in the main release will be addressed in point releases. Point releases will be published in 2 week increments following the final release (as warranted). I we're letting regressions through in the main release I'm wondering how likely they are to be fixed later. Starting with 2.066, releases will be maintained for 1 year. Meaning, point releases will be published biweekly (as warranted) for 1 year after a major release. The only changes that will be pushed during point releases are known regressions and ICE. To pull this off, I absolutely need the community's assistance. Issues must clearly indicate which version affected by a particular regression. A volunteer to help me track and categorize ice and regressions would do wonders. Also, I need access to publish and upload to the s3 server. I cannot wait around on for files to be synched across servers or web pages to be updated with one word changes before I can take the next step, it is extremely time consuming and deteriorates productivity. Note: there will normally be a 4 week break between release cycles. When a cycle is extended, the break will be reduced to 3 weeks. This particular cycle will start early because 2.066 ended 5 weeks after the planned release date. All this should be written down somewhere in the wiki. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 20 August 2014 02:41, Andrew Edwards via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: On 8/19/14, 1:26 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 8/18/14, 5:23 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: On 8/18/2014 7:14 PM, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Seconded. Well that's what happened - someone started 2.067. What's the advantage of doing this? Now we need to worry about master and 2.067 instead of just master. -- Andrei That was my doing... I am preparing myself for the next go around. The actual branch will be created on Sunday (24 Aug) for a Monday (0900 PDT) announcement. The beta cycle will run eight weeks following that. On the fourth week (22 Sept) I will transition from beta to RC. Hurrah! Iain
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
thank you general for your selfish and user considered release. the lieutenants probably feel kind of really taken care of - as well as D users. how do you test and release at facebook. i am a user that considers to leave after many years. i am starting to dislike the language, as it is getting blown up and the the syntax getting ever weirder, less mainstream and a support for windows that really sucks. good luck in the future for all you guys On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 22:27:28 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 8/19/14, 3:09 PM, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 21:13:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Walter, now that release is out can you please state your opinion about https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3651 ? It is blocking Phobos module split and decoupling. LGTM. Any opposition to merging? -- Andrei Walter seems to be the only one :) http://forum.dlang.org/post/lt00a9$2uoe$1...@digitalmars.com I think it would be great to motivate the change properly. -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:07:27 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: i myself using dmd-git-head and heavily ;-) patched gdc, but when i tried to convince my co-workers to use D, they looked at the page with releases first. not feature list or some comparisons. neither to buglist. as this is relatively young language, it must have frequent releases with bugfixes and new features! they tolerate some regressions in some releases, but they want to see that releases. don't ask me why they thinking like this. i don't know. but it's the fact. Can't it be addressed by publishing release schedule, like llvm does it, to indicate the work is going on?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:19:37 + Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: Can't it be addressed by publishing release schedule, like llvm does it, to indicate the work is going on? hm. sounds reasonable. ;-) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:15:53 + disapointed user via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: support for windows that really sucks. that is 'cause windows really sucks. good luck in the future for all you guys you too. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
too bad that i wasted my time for such a long time. i post a link to that thread with your answer to everywhere i can, so that others won't waste their time too. anyway good luck in the future for you linux guys. On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 09:37:24 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:15:53 + disapointed user via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: support for windows that really sucks. that is 'cause windows really sucks. good luck in the future for all you guys you too.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 09:15:54 UTC, disapointed user wrote: thank you general for your selfish and user considered release. the lieutenants probably feel kind of really taken care of - as well as D users. how do you test and release at facebook. i am a user that considers to leave after many years. i am starting to dislike the language, as it is getting blown up and the the syntax getting ever weirder, less mainstream and a support for windows that really sucks. good luck in the future for all you guys Anything specific you have problems with? Syntax changes aren't all that common these days (*dodges rock thrown by Brian Schott*) and Windows support is pretty solid. What I consider to be the last remaining large piece, 32-bit COFF support, was just merged.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/19/14, 7:28 PM, Brad Anderson wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 11:12:25 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote: [...] In essence, it was always this big, just you never saw it because it got downloaded during the installation process. It was also significantly bigger before because the download it did was the 30MB dmd zip that contained files for all platform, not just Windows. The installer is LZMA compressed too so it's even smaller than the dmd windows-only zip (16MB). Because of this, download size is now 1/3rd what it was and installation size dropped from 176 MB to just 71 MB. Glad to finally see that one taken care of! -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/19/14, 5:14 PM, Andrew Edwards wrote: Actually you can believe it. I am the one that called for the release and it pay ZERO attention to those two languages with the mild exception that when I have time I crack open a Java book to try to learn a little programming. Yah, to amend my previous post: the release time was chosen by Andrew and the announcement time was chosen by me. Apparently neither of us knew about the other language announcements :o). -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/20/14, 2:15 AM, disapointed user wrote: thank you general for your selfish and user considered release. the lieutenants probably feel kind of really taken care of - as well as D users. how do you test and release at facebook. i am a user that considers to leave after many years. i am starting to dislike the language, as it is getting blown up and the the syntax getting ever weirder, less mainstream and a support for windows that really sucks. good luck in the future for all you guys What is it that we could help with? -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/19/14, 4:38 PM, safety0ff wrote: I find it hard to believe that it is just a coincidence that a surprise release occurred on the same day as Java 9 and C++14 announcements. For my part I had no idea, and the exact announcement time was solely up to me. -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/19/14, 6:41 PM, Andrew Edwards wrote: On 8/19/14, 1:26 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 8/18/14, 5:23 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: On 8/18/2014 7:14 PM, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Seconded. Well that's what happened - someone started 2.067. What's the advantage of doing this? Now we need to worry about master and 2.067 instead of just master. -- Andrei That was my doing... I am preparing myself for the next go around. The actual branch will be created on Sunday (24 Aug) for a Monday (0900 PDT) announcement. The beta cycle will run eight weeks following that. On the fourth week (22 Sept) I will transition from beta to RC. [snip] Love the systematic approach. Thanks! -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 09:15:54 UTC, disapointed user wrote: the the syntax getting ever weirder, less mainstream and a While I agree with some of your remarks (particularily, the fact that it becomes too scripting language) ... where to go? I don't like Go (syntax, mainly). The sole contender in the C++-like family, for systems programming, would be Vala, but since they dropped the posix profile... :(
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 22:00:58 UTC, eles wrote: On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 09:15:54 UTC, disapointed user wrote: the the syntax getting ever weirder, less mainstream and a While I agree with some of your remarks (particularily, the fact that it becomes too scripting language) ... where to go? I don't like Go (syntax, mainly). The sole contender in the C++-like family, for systems programming, would be Vala, but since they dropped the posix profile... :( I don't know, but I am keeping an eye on bitc: http://www.coyotos.org/pipermail/bitc-dev/ I like how Shapiro discuss the various issues.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 22:00:58 UTC, eles wrote: On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 09:15:54 UTC, disapointed user wrote: the the syntax getting ever weirder, less mainstream and a While I agree with some of your remarks (particularily, the fact that it becomes too scripting language) ... where to go? I don't like Go (syntax, mainly). The sole contender in the C++-like family, for systems programming, would be Vala, but since they dropped the posix profile... :( D has set a new standard for me. No CTFE, no thanks.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:18:09 -0700 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: What is it that we could help with? -- Andrei he's drama queen, he doesn't need any help, only attention. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 22:00:57 + eles via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: I don't like Go (syntax, mainly). The sole contender in the C++-like family, for systems programming, would be Vala, but since they dropped the posix profile... :( language without CTFE is soo unpleasant to use after D. i'm programmed in various lisps and schemes and was very glad to find the C-like language with metaprogramming abilities. and I WANT AST MACROS! ;-) no, i don't want to write code to *support* AST macros, i want to write code that *uses* AST macros. ;-) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
I remember that it was planned to add functional future for iteration throw elements. Something like: ().times ().do But I can't find original post about it and nothing related in changelogs...
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 18/08/14 21:00, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 Did someone finish the changelog? -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 18/08/14 22:43, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: I agree, I am also surprised that 2.066 was released despite the regressions. Same here. How is it decided when it's time to cut off a new release? Do we have two RCs and that's it? It seems Andrei/Walter is very stressed to get the release out. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 05:03:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 04:26:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Well that's what happened - someone started 2.067. What's the advantage of doing this? Now we need to worry about master and 2.067 instead of just master. -- Andrei Well, what you do at that point is just fix all of the regressions on the branch, and when it's ready you do another release. You don't put anything else on it. All of the normal dev work goes on master. And some point after the branch has been released as the next release, you branch again. Now, unless we have enough regressions on master that it's going to take us over a month to fix them, I think that branching right after releasing is a bit much, though if some of the regressions are bad enough, maybe it would make sense to release faster. And given how long we've been trying to get 2.066 ready after branching it and how much work has been done on master since then, maybe it makes sense. I don't know. I would have thought though that we'd aim to branch something like 2 to 4 weeks after releasing and then take about a month to make sure that all regressions are fixed so that we get a release about every two months. All the major dev work just continues on master, and it'll end up on a branch about every two months staggered from when that branch gets released as an official release. Certainly, aiming for something along those lines would get us faster releases than we've been doing. We've been waiting way too long to branch and then been rather slow about getting through all of the regressions. By branching earlier, we should be able to release more quickly. - Jonathan M Davis In that case, shouldn't it be 2.066.1?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
http://dlang.org/changelog.html Version D 2.066 August 18, 2014 ... Phobos enhancements 1.Bugzilla 3780: getopt improvements by Igor Lesik Sorry, i can't find this improvements nor in getopt.d nor in http://dlang.org/phobos/std_getopt.html. Is this announce prematurely, and that this changes will be seen in 2.067 ?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:00:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 Andrei The new Windows installer executable is over 70x bigger in 2.066 than it was for 2.065. What's the reason? http://i.imgur.com/OPsYoWf.png
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/19/14, 7:42 PM, KrzaQ wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:00:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 Andrei The new Windows installer executable is over 70x bigger in 2.066 than it was for 2.065. What's the reason? http://i.imgur.com/OPsYoWf.png Yes, the installer is self contained. Meaning it no longer downloads a zip file for use during installation. In essence, it was always this big, just you never saw it because it got downloaded during the installation process.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 19/08/2014 08:21, Jacob Carlborg wrote: Did someone finish the changelog? One thing missing is a Note on compiler conversions for unique expressions, like: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2109/files#diff-0baf0d34bf308dc66e131c0e56e4239bR761
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:47:52 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/18/2014 12:00 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 126 contributors, to be precise! Walter, now that release is out can you please state your opinion about https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3651 ? It is blocking Phobos module split and decoupling.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 05:24:56 UTC, Suliman wrote: Who could help with translation change logs to russian and publication it's on LOR? Send me an e-mail if you need any help
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 17:17:14 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 05:24:56 UTC, Suliman wrote: Who could help with translation change logs to russian and publication it's on LOR? Send me an e-mail if you need any help Thanks user Lodin already did hight quality translation! Could you help me with: I remember that it was planned to add functional future for iteration throw elements. Something like: ().times ().do But I can't find original post about it and nothing related in changelogs...
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 17:51:51 UTC, Suliman wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 17:17:14 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 05:24:56 UTC, Suliman wrote: Who could help with translation change logs to russian and publication it's on LOR? Send me an e-mail if you need any help Thanks user Lodin already did hight quality translation! Could you help me with: I remember that it was planned to add functional future for iteration throw elements. Something like: ().times ().do But I can't find original post about it and nothing related in changelogs... I remember merging this one : https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/1965 , but it was after 2.066 branch has been created. There is also https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2024 but it is still in progress. I can't remember any other similar PR - probably it was merged before I started to do Phobos reviewing though.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
I remember merging this one : https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/1965 , but it was after 2.066 branch has been created. There is also https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2024 but it is still in progress. I can't remember any other similar PR - probably it was merged before I started to do Phobos reviewing though. Big thanks!
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/19/14, 7:01 AM, Dicebot wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:47:52 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/18/2014 12:00 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 126 contributors, to be precise! Walter, now that release is out can you please state your opinion about https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3651 ? It is blocking Phobos module split and decoupling. LGTM. Any opposition to merging? -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 21:13:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Walter, now that release is out can you please state your opinion about https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3651 ? It is blocking Phobos module split and decoupling. LGTM. Any opposition to merging? -- Andrei Walter seems to be the only one :) http://forum.dlang.org/post/lt00a9$2uoe$1...@digitalmars.com
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/19/14, 3:09 PM, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 21:13:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Walter, now that release is out can you please state your opinion about https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3651 ? It is blocking Phobos module split and decoupling. LGTM. Any opposition to merging? -- Andrei Walter seems to be the only one :) http://forum.dlang.org/post/lt00a9$2uoe$1...@digitalmars.com I think it would be great to motivate the change properly. -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 15:27:34 -0700 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: I think it would be great to motivate the change properly. -- Andrei aren't it motivated enough in PR? this will allow to build real package hierarchies instead of dumping everything in one flat package. my.package, my.package.internal, my.package.network, my.package.utils, etc. it's very convient and fits good in package system. we'll have modules, packages and package hierarchies, and everyone will be free to choose what he needs. modules for tiny projects, packages for small libraries, package hierarchies for big libraries (like phobos). signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:18:46 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:14:45 UTC, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Isn't this what point-releases are for, though? I agree, I think 2.066.next should be the focus considering the known issues of 2.066. On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 20:43:44 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: How is it decided when it's time to cut off a new release? Do we have two RCs and that's it? I find it hard to believe that it is just a coincidence that a surprise release occurred on the same day as Java 9 and C++14 announcements.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 22:27:28 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 8/19/14, 3:09 PM, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 21:13:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Walter, now that release is out can you please state your opinion about https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3651 ? It is blocking Phobos module split and decoupling. LGTM. Any opposition to merging? -- Andrei Walter seems to be the only one :) http://forum.dlang.org/post/lt00a9$2uoe$1...@digitalmars.com I think it would be great to motivate the change properly. -- Andrei I am not sure what can I add to what have been already said. To summarize: Without this addition package.d is much less useful in practice - we can't separate existing modules into smaller packages without making almost all symbols public, not if at there is more there one level of nested packages in question. Dmitry needs it for splitting std.regex, it will be needed for std.meta, existing std.internal can actually become controlled by compiler instead of being undocumented convention. And using more deeply nested module hiearchies with smaller modules is one of primary means for reducing internal Phobos dependencies and improving compile times that are currently lacking. It is also 100% backwards compatible and does not introduce any new language concept being much less intrusive change than, for example, C++ namespace support recently added.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/20/14, 8:38 AM, safety0ff wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:18:46 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:14:45 UTC, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Isn't this what point-releases are for, though? I agree, I think 2.066.next should be the focus considering the known issues of 2.066. Fear not, point releases will address known deficiencies. On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 20:43:44 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: How is it decided when it's time to cut off a new release? Do we have two RCs and that's it? I find it hard to believe that it is just a coincidence that a surprise release occurred on the same day as Java 9 and C++14 announcements. Actually you can believe it. I am the one that called for the release and it pay ZERO attention to those two languages with the mild exception that when I have time I crack open a Java book to try to learn a little programming.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 00:14:59 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote: On 8/20/14, 8:38 AM, safety0ff wrote: I agree, I think 2.066.next should be the focus considering the known issues of 2.066. Fear not, point releases will address known deficiencies. Btw, thank you for the good work you've done as release manager!
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/19/14, 1:26 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 8/18/14, 5:23 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: On 8/18/2014 7:14 PM, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Seconded. Well that's what happened - someone started 2.067. What's the advantage of doing this? Now we need to worry about master and 2.067 instead of just master. -- Andrei That was my doing... I am preparing myself for the next go around. The actual branch will be created on Sunday (24 Aug) for a Monday (0900 PDT) announcement. The beta cycle will run eight weeks following that. On the fourth week (22 Sept) I will transition from beta to RC. Betas will be release 5 days apart. RCs will be released 3 days apart. If no regression is fixed during that beta/RC window, the window will be extended an additional 3/5 days (as appropriate) until either fixes are received or the review period ends: at which time the final release is prepared and published. The only thing that will extend the review period is if a regression exiting at the time RC1 is released remains open at the end of the 8 weeks. At that time an additional week will be added to the release cycle to address those specific issues. If they cannot be addressed during that additional week, the cycle will be terminated and the final release published. All regressions not addressed in the main release will be addressed in point releases. Point releases will be published in 2 week increments following the final release (as warranted). Starting with 2.066, releases will be maintained for 1 year. Meaning, point releases will be published biweekly (as warranted) for 1 year after a major release. The only changes that will be pushed during point releases are known regressions and ICE. To pull this off, I absolutely need the community's assistance. Issues must clearly indicate which version affected by a particular regression. A volunteer to help me track and categorize ice and regressions would do wonders. Also, I need access to publish and upload to the s3 server. I cannot wait around on for files to be synched across servers or web pages to be updated with one word changes before I can take the next step, it is extremely time consuming and deteriorates productivity. Note: there will normally be a 4 week break between release cycles. When a cycle is extended, the break will be reduced to 3 weeks. This particular cycle will start early because 2.066 ended 5 weeks after the planned release date. Andrew
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 11:12:25 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote: [...] In essence, it was always this big, just you never saw it because it got downloaded during the installation process. It was also significantly bigger before because the download it did was the 30MB dmd zip that contained files for all platform, not just Windows. The installer is LZMA compressed too so it's even smaller than the dmd windows-only zip (16MB). Because of this, download size is now 1/3rd what it was and installation size dropped from 176 MB to just 71 MB.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:41:29 +0900 Andrew Edwards via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: btw. http://wiki.dlang.org/Beta_Testing contains bug #10928 as blocker, but it's marked as RESOLVED FIXED in bugzilla. and bug #12696 needs to be rechecked, as it seems to be fixed too. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
I have a mixed feelings about this release. It has some really cool features and is good to finally see live. But it has taken ages and there are still many open regressions (http://wiki.dlang.org/Beta_Testing). And stuff like https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11946 is just small disaster - complicated by the fact that no one but Kenji seems to be able neither to fix it nor even revert it. I don't know if we can do anything better about it.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/18/2014 12:00 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Congratulations to everyone involved! http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2dwqvy/d_2066_nogc_c_namespaces_multidimensional_slices/ https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/905593426121006 https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/501443132115140609 126 contributors, to be precise!
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:00:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Support for new flag -vcolumns in Emacs FlyCheck is soon about to follow: https://github.com/flycheck/flycheck/issues/460
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:23:14 UTC, Dicebot wrote: I have a mixed feelings about this release. It has some really cool features and is good to finally see live. But it has taken ages and there are still many open regressions (http://wiki.dlang.org/Beta_Testing). And stuff like https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11946 is just small disaster - complicated by the fact that no one but Kenji seems to be able neither to fix it nor even revert it. I don't know if we can do anything better about it. I agree, I am also surprised that 2.066 was released despite the regressions. I uncovered a few just by accidentally instructing someone on #d to build their project against git HEAD. Most of the regressions were found in his project's dub dependencies - libraries published on code.dlang.org. I was thinking of trying to see if more projects on the dub registry failed to build with the 2.066 RC once the current round of regressions was resolved. How is it decided when it's time to cut off a new release? Do we have two RCs and that's it?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 20:43:44 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:23:14 UTC, Dicebot wrote: I have a mixed feelings about this release. It has some really cool features and is good to finally see live. But it has taken ages and there are still many open regressions (http://wiki.dlang.org/Beta_Testing). And stuff like https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11946 is just small disaster - complicated by the fact that no one but Kenji seems to be able neither to fix it nor even revert it. I don't know if we can do anything better about it. I agree, I am also surprised that 2.066 was released despite the regressions. I uncovered a few just by accidentally instructing someone on #d to build their project against git HEAD. Most of the regressions were found in his project's dub dependencies - libraries published on code.dlang.org. I was thinking of trying to see if more projects on the dub registry failed to build with the 2.066 RC once the current round of regressions was resolved. How is it decided when it's time to cut off a new release? Do we have two RCs and that's it? I don't know. There was nothing in the mail list until Andrei came with announcement and I did not expect it at all - in fact I would have merged one of regression fixes for Phobos 12 hours earlier otherwise.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 19:23:14 UTC, Dicebot wrote: I don't know if we can do anything better about it. 2.067
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Vladimir Panteleev: I agree, I am also surprised that 2.066 was released despite the regressions. There is an apparently endless stream of regressions, I have found another today (https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13321 ). I think D is not yet at the stage of its development where it can hope to fix all the regressions. So if you try to wait for all regressions to be fixed, you never ship a compiler version, and this has serious disadvantages. So better to be a little more practical for now. 2.066 has took ages to come out, it was overdue. I hope 2.067 will come out much quicker. Bye, bearophile
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 21:57:19 UTC, bearophile wrote: Vladimir Panteleev: I agree, I am also surprised that 2.066 was released despite the regressions. There is an apparently endless stream of regressions, I have found another today (https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13321 ). I think D is not yet at the stage of its development where it can hope to fix all the regressions. So if you try to wait for all regressions to be fixed, you never ship a compiler version, and this has serious disadvantages. So better to be a little more practical for now. 2.066 has took ages to come out, it was overdue. I hope 2.067 will come out much quicker. Bye, bearophile What's the advantage of this over maintaing packages for the RC version until it's ready?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 22:01:24 + bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: What's the advantage of this over maintaing packages for the RC version until it's ready? 'cause not releasing periodically means ah, it will never be ready! let's look at another language, D is not worth using yet. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 22:20:19 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 22:01:24 + bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: What's the advantage of this over maintaing packages for the RC version until it's ready? 'cause not releasing periodically means ah, it will never be ready! let's look at another language, D is not worth using yet. I don't see how infrequent, stable releases are more likely to provoke that reaction than frequent, unstable releases.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 22:48:00 + Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: I don't see how infrequent, stable releases are more likely to provoke that reaction than frequent, unstable releases. stability is something that cannot be achieved in living language. and having official releases with new features is important to show that project is alive and mature. i myself using dmd-git-head and heavily ;-) patched gdc, but when i tried to convince my co-workers to use D, they looked at the page with releases first. not feature list or some comparisons. neither to buglist. as this is relatively young language, it must have frequent releases with bugfixes and new features! they tolerate some regressions in some releases, but they want to see that releases. don't ask me why they thinking like this. i don't know. but it's the fact. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 21:57:19 UTC, bearophile wrote: Vladimir Panteleev: I agree, I am also surprised that 2.066 was released despite the regressions. There is an apparently endless stream of regressions, I have found another today (https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13321 ). I think D is not yet at the stage of its development where it can hope to fix all the regressions. So if you try to wait for all regressions to be fixed, you never ship a compiler version, and this has serious disadvantages. So better to be a little more practical for now. 2.066 has took ages to come out, it was overdue. I hope 2.067 will come out much quicker. Bye, bearophile I have checked the regression list daily since something like b3 - amount of hard regressions was steadily going down and many of newly added one were trivial and fixed quickly. Last time I checked there were only 2-3 really problematic cases (including one I have mentioned). Idea is quite simple - if we are incapable of doing compiler release without regressions, we should stop doing compiler releases until we learn how to do it. Risk of reputation damage we may get with 2.066 costs much more than delaying release even for several months. Remember, we are speaking about regressions, not even about critical bugs. I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:14:45 UTC, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Isn't this what point-releases are for, though?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:18:46 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:14:45 UTC, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Isn't this what point-releases are for, though? Why can't we have both? :) Point is that with current tempo it will take exactly 1.5-2 months to fix all stuff for next release if we start right now, otherwise it is likely to take as long as 2.066
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/18/2014 7:07 PM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 22:48:00 + Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: I don't see how infrequent, stable releases are more likely to provoke that reaction than frequent, unstable releases. stability is something that cannot be achieved in living language. and having official releases with new features is important to show that project is alive and mature. i myself using dmd-git-head and heavily ;-) patched gdc, but when i tried to convince my co-workers to use D, they looked at the page with releases first. not feature list or some comparisons. neither to buglist. as this is relatively young language, it must have frequent releases with bugfixes and new features! they tolerate some regressions in some releases, but they want to see that releases. don't ask me why they thinking like this. i don't know. but it's the fact. Well, people will invent *any* excuse to pass over anything they don't feel like bothering with. It sounds like that's probably what they were doing.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/18/2014 7:14 PM, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Seconded.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 00:23:22 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: On 8/18/2014 7:14 PM, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Seconded. Regardless of whether we start another release going that quickly or not, I think that we really need to figure out how to be doing regressionless releases more along the lines of 2 months apart. And if we're getting a lot of those, maybe we should operate more like the linux kernel, which has a merge window of something like a week after a release before they start turning that into the next release - in which case we would do something like continue to merge changes into master all the time but create a new branch and start regressing it within a week or two of actually completing the previous release. Certainly, I don't think that we should wait more than a month before branching, since if we took a month, that would leave a month to get all of the regressions ironed out and still have a 2 month release cycle, and with how things have been going, I'm not sure that we'd even manage to do that in a month. - Jonathan M Davis
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 20:22:08 -0400 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: Well, people will invent *any* excuse to pass over anything they don't feel like bothering with. It sounds like that's probably what they were doing. not exactly, 'cause they *are* interested in using D, especially after i demonstrated some 'D power' and pointed 'em to the excellent Ali's book. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Hmm, list of bug fixes in dlang.org/changelog.html contains bugs that have been fixed but yet pushed into 2.066 branch.
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On 8/18/14, 5:23 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: On 8/18/2014 7:14 PM, Dicebot wrote: I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and declare it yet another bug-fixing release. Seconded. Well that's what happened - someone started 2.067. What's the advantage of doing this? Now we need to worry about master and 2.067 instead of just master. -- Andrei
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 04:26:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Well that's what happened - someone started 2.067. What's the advantage of doing this? Now we need to worry about master and 2.067 instead of just master. -- Andrei Well, what you do at that point is just fix all of the regressions on the branch, and when it's ready you do another release. You don't put anything else on it. All of the normal dev work goes on master. And some point after the branch has been released as the next release, you branch again. Now, unless we have enough regressions on master that it's going to take us over a month to fix them, I think that branching right after releasing is a bit much, though if some of the regressions are bad enough, maybe it would make sense to release faster. And given how long we've been trying to get 2.066 ready after branching it and how much work has been done on master since then, maybe it makes sense. I don't know. I would have thought though that we'd aim to branch something like 2 to 4 weeks after releasing and then take about a month to make sure that all regressions are fixed so that we get a release about every two months. All the major dev work just continues on master, and it'll end up on a branch about every two months staggered from when that branch gets released as an official release. Certainly, aiming for something along those lines would get us faster releases than we've been doing. We've been waiting way too long to branch and then been rather slow about getting through all of the regressions. By branching earlier, we should be able to release more quickly. - Jonathan M Davis
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Who could help with translation change logs to russian and publication it's on LOR?
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 05:24:54 + Suliman via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: Who could help with translation change logs to russian and publication it's on LOR? DYI. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 05:24:54 + Suliman via Digitalmars-d-announce digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote: Who could help with translation change logs to russian and publication it's on LOR? sorry, i mean DIY. ;-) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
