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: COFF support for Win32 merged
Am 19.08.2014 03:25, schrieb Nick Sabalausky: On 8/17/2014 5:57 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I though that this might be important enough to share on the announce list: A pull request [1] by Rainer Schuetze which adds COFF support for Win32 has recently been merged by Walter. It seems to be enabled using the -m32mscoff flag. [1] https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3843 Heh, couldn't have come at a better time. I *just* hit this little nugget of fun: Error 45: Too Much DEBUG Data for Old CodeView format I've been hitting that regularly in recent times, which is why I'm using this fix: https://github.com/DigitalMars/optlink/pull/15 It basically just disables the error message, so it would be good if Walter would comment on it. At least the error message seems to imply that the limit only exists for the older CodeView formats.
Re: COFF support for Win32 merged
On 17/08/14 11:57, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I though that this might be important enough to share on the announce list: A pull request [1] by Rainer Schuetze which adds COFF support for Win32 has recently been merged by Walter. It seems to be enabled using the -m32mscoff flag. The runtime part has been merged now as well: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/928 -- /Jacob Carlborg
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: Memcached client
On Wednesday, 12 March 2014 at 21:30:29 UTC, Tiberiu Gal wrote: Hi, I'm writing a memcached client library for d. It's dependent on vibe-d - but this can be fixed . https://github.com/TiberiuGal/memcached4d I'd appreciate some feedback. thanks Wonderful, I will give it a try
Fix #2529: explicit protection package #3651
On 8/19/2014 7:01 AM, Dicebot 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. I keep thinking there's gotta be a way to do this without language changes.
Re: Fix #2529: explicit protection package #3651
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 17:08:25 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/19/2014 7:01 AM, Dicebot 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. I keep thinking there's gotta be a way to do this without language changes. Any specific ideas? I can't imagine any clean solution - and proposed language extensions fits naturally into existing system without introducing any new concepts. It is also somewhat frequently asked about in NG.
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: Dutyl - a Vim plugin for running D tools
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 07:24:28 UTC, francesco cattoglio
wrote:
On Thursday, 14 August 2014 at 22:20:52 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
GitHub repo: https://github.com/idanarye/vim-dutyl
vim.org page:
http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=5003
Very very nice... So... how does it work?
I added a Bundle idanarye/vim-dutyl to my $MTVIMRC.
I added the following three lines as well
let g:dutyl_stdImportPaths=['C:\D\dmd2\src\phobos']
call dutyl#register#tool('dcd-client','C:/D/DCD/dcd-client')
call dutyl#register#tool('dcd-server','C:/D/DCD/dcd-server')
When I try to do a completion with ctrl-X ctrl-O I get DCD
server to only output some errors:
Cannot cache modules in
C:\some\folder\for\dub\packages\derelict-blabla\ -I
E:\my\project\subfolder because it does not exist
(The folders are in the filesystem, I can confirm they DO exist)
Am I missing something, or should I open an issue at github?
OK, I found the real culprit - it's the backslash before the
double quotes. Even tough Windows uses backqoutes for separation,
it still uses them as escape characters when placed before
special characters...
Anyways, version 1.0.1 is out with many bugfixes and speedups -
including a fix for this problem.
Re: Fix #2529: explicit protection package #3651
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 17:11:19 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 17:08:25 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/19/2014 7:01 AM, Dicebot 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. I keep thinking there's gotta be a way to do this without language changes. Any specific ideas? I can't imagine any clean solution - and proposed language extensions fits naturally into existing system without introducing any new concepts. It is also somewhat frequently asked about in NG. Yeah, I don't see how this could be done without a language change. Currently, modules in sub-packages are treated no differently from modules in completely different packages, so anything you did to give access to a module in a super-package to one in a sub-package would give access to any module. - Jonathan M Davis
Re: Fix #2529: explicit protection package #3651
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 17:11:19 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 17:08:25 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/19/2014 7:01 AM, Dicebot 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. I keep thinking there's gotta be a way to do this without language changes. Any specific ideas? I can't imagine any clean solution - and proposed language extensions fits naturally into existing system without introducing any new concepts. It is also somewhat frequently asked about in NG. To put it differently - this issue is a very real blocker for some of planned Phobos changes (pretty much anything that is going to use package.d) and it has been hanging around for a long time. If you are going to propose alternative solution I'd be very glad to see it sooner than later as everyone else who has commented on that topic seems to be satisfied with the proposal.
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: Voting: std.logger
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 02:55:52 UTC, Dicebot wrote: Results: http://wiki.dlang.org/Review/std.logger#Voting_for_std.experimental The link to the team-phobos page doesn't work for me, so I'm not entirely sure what it is (list of users with commit rights?), but in any case, I don't think I'm on any such list (I don't have commit rights for Phobos).
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: Voting: std.logger
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 21:23:20 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote: On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 02:55:52 UTC, Dicebot wrote: Results: http://wiki.dlang.org/Review/std.logger#Voting_for_std.experimental The link to the team-phobos page doesn't work for me, so I'm not entirely sure what it is (list of users with commit rights?), but in any case, I don't think I'm on any such list (I don't have commit rights for Phobos). There was a mail list vote recently about adding you to Phobos commiters and remembering no objections I just presumed it has already happened :O (It should have been!)
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
Re: LDC 0.14.0 released!
On Friday, 15 August 2014 at 15:04:44 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote: Hi everyone, LDC 0.14.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! This release is based on the 2.065.0 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.1-3.4.2 (OS X: 3.2/3.4 only). As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/ynlnfdqwkweenkwct...@forum.dlang.org Regards, Kai I managed to get mentioned in LLVM Weekly again. (http://llvmweekly.org/issue/33) LLVM weekly is a newsletter with high attention in the LLVM world. Regards, Kai
