Re: CMake support for D
On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 at 14:32:54 UTC, King_DuckZ wrote: On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 at 09:20:21 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: [...] Right, I stand corrected about Rust, though as you say there are those who use it with CMake. About cmake-d, there's this https://github.com/dcarp/cmake-d/issues/19, which I could work around. More seriously though, it doesn't track dependencies between .d files. So if for example you have: [...] Are there any news at all about CMake support? Should I just give up?
Re: CMake support for D
On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 at 09:20:21 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 20:28 +, King_DuckZ via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
[…]
One [more] year ahead, and I found this old thread I had
forgotten about. In the meantime, trentforkert has stopped
(apparently) working on cmake, and dcarp's has failed me for
projects larger than a couple files. It also looks like it's
not receiving updates anymore.
The DCarp CMake-D repository is active. If it doesn't work then
it just needs more work.
All of this kept me away from D. Now that gdc is rumoured to
get merged into gcc 8 tho, is there any concrete chance of
this happening? I think even rust (which came out after D) has
decent cmake support at this point.
As far as I am aware CMake is not used for Rust, the vast
majority of people use Cargo. This mean it is certain some Rust
people will use CMake. :-)
It is worth noting that the Rust plugin to CLion does not
require CMake, it uses Cargo. CLion not IDEA is not the focus
of the Rust plugin due to debugging. CLion is the platform for
all native code language for JetBrains as I understand it
exacly because of debugging support. I believe the work on D
plugin support for IntelliJ IDEA should refocus on CLion. It
can still use Dub it seems, and it can get access to the
debugging framework.
Clearly it would still be good in D had CMake support. It
strikes me the DCarp's CMake-D repository is the one to support.
Right, I stand corrected about Rust, though as you say there are
those who use it with CMake.
About cmake-d, there's this
https://github.com/dcarp/cmake-d/issues/19, which I could work
around. More seriously though, it doesn't track dependencies
between .d files. So if for example you have:
// a.d
void foo() {}
// b.d
import a;
int main() { foo(); return 0; }
and compile it, all goes well. Now if you change a to be:
//a.d
void foo(a=10) { //use a somewhere }
and just 'make' then you're in for some really funky crash (it
may not be the exact code, but I had a problem very similar to
this). The only fix is make clean; make. This is really hard to
spot as soon as you start having more than a couple files, and
it's really something the build system should take care of.
Unfortunately I don't think a purely scripted solution for cmake
will ever be able to handle this problem.
Speaking of CLion, at this point I've pretty much abandoned it,
vim is more than enough for me. My problem is mixing D with C and
C++, and with being already so familiar with CMake that starting
all over again just puts me off to the point I'd rather not do
any D at all. Build systems are not my passion really, and
learning CMake was already painful enough.
Re: CMake support for D
On Monday, 16 January 2017 at 19:44:34 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 17:47 +, King_DuckZ via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: […] > Meson can build D stuff out of the box. > Hadn't heard of this before, I'll have a look. Btw I don't see any mention of D on their home page. It is very nice. D seems to work OOTB. […] I'm not saying we shouldn't be learning things, but time is limited and I'd rather practice my C++ or D than learn yet another build system, especially if I only have limited use for it :) Some of us find build fun. […] One [more] year ahead, and I found this old thread I had forgotten about. In the meantime, trentforkert has stopped (apparently) working on cmake, and dcarp's has failed me for projects larger than a couple files. It also looks like it's not receiving updates anymore. All of this kept me away from D. Now that gdc is rumoured to get merged into gcc 8 tho, is there any concrete chance of this happening? I think even rust (which came out after D) has decent cmake support at this point.
Re: CMake support for D
On Monday, 16 January 2017 at 12:29:46 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 11:40 +, King_DuckZ via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: On Sunday, 3 January 2016 at 17:30:15 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote: > Does CMake recognise D in the enable_language command? > > If not is there a workaround? > > Thanks and Regards > Dibyendu One year later, is there any progress on this? Now that gdc has gained support for .so (it seems), lack of cmake support is the only thing that is preventing me from adopting D. I agree that cmake is not the prettiest thing out there, but I think there are many good reasons for wanting it: Does this do the job? https://github.com/dcarp/cmake-d I had forgotten about that... I even used it at some point a long time ago, maybe I should give it another try, since it seems to have received lots of commits since then! 1) As already said, it's needed for CLion I wish CLion would support Meson. Meson can build D stuff out of the box. Hadn't heard of this before, I'll have a look. Btw I don't see any mention of D on their home page. 2) Many programmers, including myself, are already familiar with its syntax - pretty or not, learning a new tool is extra work Which can actually be a good thing, learning is something we should all be doing all the time. I'm not saying we shouldn't be learning things, but time is limited and I'd rather practice my C++ or D than learn yet another build system, especially if I only have limited use for it :) 3) As far as I know, you can't mix C++ and D with dub I'm having difficulty getting Dub to compile D and clean up afterwards. :-( 4) I could just drop D code in my pre-existing C++ projects without much effort on the build system I was going to try moving Me TV from C++ to D, but the path of least resistance is to just continue with it in C++ and put all the C++17 stuff in. I feel the same about many small tools I wrote. I hope to hear some promising news on this side!
