On 2016-11-17 11:16, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
It seems to use MinGW-w64, which uses the GNU linker, which can't create
PDB files.
I thought the whole tool chain was based on LLVM, but I might be wrong.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 17:34:58 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Why is it a wart? The MS toolchain is the system development
environment for Windows. On Mac OS X, it's Xcode, which is a 1+
GB download before you can do any development with clang or dmd
or anything that depends on it. On
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 18:03:31 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
Perhaps we should take the missing parts from the ELLCC tool
chain [1]. It's a cross-compiler tool chain based on LLVM. It
contains a compiler, linker, C/C++ standard library, other
binutils and is completely self contained.
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 17:19:28 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
Another issue I had with the Microsoft Package besides the
size it wants on the system drive is the difficulty to even
get it to download behind a corporate proxy.
Doesn't it pick whatever is configured in the system
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 04:04:05 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
And then we'll get complaints that they need another big
download just to compile basic 32bit programs... This whole
argument about making changes is rediculas.
Unless we get explicit permission from Microsoft to
On 2016-11-16 09:19, Patrick Schluter wrote:
go doesn't need the MS tools apparently.
As far as I know Go uses static linking and contains its own linker.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2016-11-14 08:59, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
I still have an "old fashioned" HDD-only in my PC (a laptop):
dirt-cheap: <$100 for 1TB (try to find an SSD that remotely compares),
and the ONLY time I ever have speed issues in either Win or Lin is when
I'm running far too much crap and start
On 2016-11-14 09:05, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
The Linux and Mac versions rely on Linux/Mac's native C linkers,
regardless of 32/64 bit.
Yeah. On macOS, Xcode is a 4.x GB download size and 12 GB install size
(just looking at what I currently have).
Perhaps we should take the missing parts
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 17:06:37 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
I get the technical reasons for using the MS toolchain but that
doesn't change the fact that it is an ugly wart that has
several negative aspect. Because in addition to the cases
already described where it can be a pita
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 17:06:37 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 09:21:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 14:41:34 UTC, Daniel Kozak
wrote:
AFAIK ld on mingw can`t link against mscoff file format so it
is not very usable.
It's
On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 at 09:21:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 14:41:34 UTC, Daniel Kozak
wrote:
AFAIK ld on mingw can`t link against mscoff file format so it
is not very usable.
It's dmd/optlink that don't support mscoff, mingw supports only
mscoff.
LLD is
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 14:41:34 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
AFAIK ld on mingw can`t link against mscoff file format so it
is not very usable.
It's dmd/optlink that don't support mscoff, mingw supports only
mscoff.
LLD is quite new so I do not know how production ready is.
AFAIK
Dne 16.11.2016 v 04:17 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
On 16/11/2016 3:41 AM, Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Dne 15.11.2016 v 14:23 AB via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 11:28:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 10:31:23
On 16/11/2016 4:58 PM, Jerry wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 23:34:34 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 16:20:53 AB via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 16:00:48 UTC, kink wrote:
> It's not just the linker. You need the libs as well (static >
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 23:34:34 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 16:20:53 AB via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 16:00:48 UTC, kink wrote:
> It's not just the linker. You need the libs as well (static
> and dynamic ones), and not just the
On 16/11/2016 3:41 AM, Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Dne 15.11.2016 v 14:23 AB via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 11:28:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 10:31:23 UTC, AB wrote:
Are there plans to write a homebrew 64-bit linker for DMD?
On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 16:20:53 AB via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 16:00:48 UTC, kink wrote:
> > It's not just the linker. You need the libs as well (static and
> > dynamic ones), and not just the WinSDK ones, but the MSVCRT
> > ones too.
>
> I was under the
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 17:31:04 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
I don't really use emacs, and (thought I admit I'm not 100%
certain), I don't think much of what I use launches (or at
least needs to launch) separate commands for each keypress
(sounds like bad software engineering to me,
On 11/15/2016 03:33 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 16:59:56 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
the ONLY time I ever have speed issues
"Speed issues" is one thing. Having most operations be INSTANT is
another. It MASSIVELY transforms your workflow; UIs where each key
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 17:23:56 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
I mean "too small at reasonable prices".
If you keep your photos/movies/music/backups/installers/etc. on
spinning rust (where they belong), and aren't living in poverty,
it's not. A 250GB Samsung 850 EVO is under $100,
On 11/15/2016 03:33 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 16:59:56 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
SSDs are still far too small.
Hmm...
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/08/seagate-unveils-60tb-ssd-the-worlds-largest-hard-drive/
I mean "too small at reasonable
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 16:20:53 UTC, AB wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 16:00:48 UTC, kink wrote:
It's not just the linker. You need the libs as well (static
and dynamic ones), and not just the WinSDK ones, but the
MSVCRT ones too.
I was under the impression that DMD for
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 16:20:53 UTC, AB wrote:
Hopefully, future releases of DMD will fix this inconsistency
by requiring Visual Studio for 32-bit D programs as well.
You already do, if you compile with -m32mscoff.
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 16:00:48 UTC, kink wrote:
It's not just the linker. You need the libs as well (static and
dynamic ones), and not just the WinSDK ones, but the MSVCRT
ones too.
I was under the impression that DMD for Windows was (meant to be)
self-sufficient. I must have been
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 13:23:38 UTC, AB wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 11:28:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 10:31:23 UTC, AB wrote:
Are there plans to write a homebrew 64-bit linker for DMD?
There are already ld from mingw and lld from llvm team.
Dne 15.11.2016 v 14:23 AB via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 11:28:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 10:31:23 UTC, AB wrote:
Are there plans to write a homebrew 64-bit linker for DMD?
There are already ld from mingw and lld from llvm team.
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 11:28:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 10:31:23 UTC, AB wrote:
Are there plans to write a homebrew 64-bit linker for DMD?
There are already ld from mingw and lld from llvm team.
Why aren't they used and distributed in DMD for Windows by
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 10:31:23 UTC, AB wrote:
Are there plans to write a homebrew 64-bit linker for DMD?
There are already ld from mingw and lld from llvm team.
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 10:20:48 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:51:39 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
Now there is
http://landinghub.visualstudio.com/visual-cpp-build-tools,
perhaps we should be encouraging using that instead?
It's still 3gb, so one might want to delete
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 09:02:08 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 08:33:26 UTC, Vladimir
Panteleev wrote:
UIs where each key press launches a command (e.g. magit,
background builds...)
emacs?
Yep.
Also doesn't dmdfe spend most of its time in semantic analysis?
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 08:33:26 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
UIs where each key press launches a command (e.g. magit,
background builds...)
emacs?
Also doesn't dmdfe spend most of its time in semantic analysis?
You can't possibly optimize that with IO.
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 13:44:29 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
That's a true issue imho also. I had the same problem. Both my
machine at work and at home have their windows system partition
on a smallish SSD.
You can move stuff from the system drive with symbolic links;
e.g.
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 16:59:56 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
SSDs are still far too small.
Hmm...
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/08/seagate-unveils-60tb-ssd-the-worlds-largest-hard-drive/
the ONLY time I ever have speed issues
"Speed issues" is one thing. Having most
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 13:44:29 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
Extremely annoying when you only want to install an otherwise
extremely lean development tool (dmd) to test 100 liners.
But you most probably don't need all that stuff for testing your
100-liners. By default DMD on Windows
Dne 14.11.2016 v 21:01 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
But most importantly:
In what alternate 2016 reality is a 250GB drive insufficient to be
able to spare 3Gb to install a core dev tool?
First it is more than a 3GB, on my windows it has been around 10GB or
more for VS and
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 20:01:37 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
On 11/14/2016 01:04 PM, fdjfgj wrote:
In 2005 a 250Gb magnetic HDD costed the same as nowadays 250Gb
SSD.
Eh? 2005 has nothing to do with anything.
In 2016, magnetic HDDs are not purchased at 2005 prices.
In 2016, a 250GB
On 11/14/2016 01:04 PM, fdjfgj wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 16:59:56 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 11/14/2016 08:44 AM, Patrick Schluter wrote:
have their windows system partition on a smallish SSD.
Well, in all honestly, that IS going to cause problems regardless. The
larger SSDs
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 18:04:05 UTC, fdjfgj wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 16:59:56 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
On 11/14/2016 08:44 AM, Patrick Schluter wrote:
have their windows system partition on a smallish SSD.
Well, in all honestly, that IS going to cause problems
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 16:59:56 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
On 11/14/2016 08:44 AM, Patrick Schluter wrote:
have their windows system partition on a smallish SSD.
Well, in all honestly, that IS going to cause problems
regardless. The larger SSDs are fine (enough) for a phone, but
On 11/14/2016 04:33 AM, AB wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:06:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
DMD can generate 64-bit object files just fine, you only need to link
them, and DMD can invoke ms linker for you, that's all.
It is unreasonable to pull in the many GBs of Visual Studio as a
On 11/14/2016 08:44 AM, Patrick Schluter wrote:
have their windows system partition on a smallish SSD.
Well, in all honestly, that IS going to cause problems regardless. The
larger SSDs are fine (enough) for a phone, but for a PC that's used for
anything more than the average joe's
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:33:48 UTC, AB wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:06:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
DMD can generate 64-bit object files just fine, you only need
to link them, and DMD can invoke ms linker for you, that's all.
It is unreasonable to pull in the many GBs of Visual
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 13:44:29 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
That's a true issue imho also. I had the same problem. Both my
machine at work and at home have their windows system partition
on a smallish SSD. Installing Visual Studio failed because of
lack of space. Even installing
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 08:38:32 UTC, AB wrote:
Installing D 2.072.0 on Windows 7 64-bit. After installation is
complete I get the following two error (warning?) messages,
screenshots here:
http://imgur.com/a/5fydB
For your convenience they read as follows:
"Could not detect Visual
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 10:20:48 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:51:39 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
Now there is
http://landinghub.visualstudio.com/visual-cpp-build-tools,
perhaps we should be encouraging using that instead?
It's still 3gb, so one might want to delete
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:33:48 UTC, AB wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:06:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
DMD can generate 64-bit object files just fine, you only need
to link them, and DMD can invoke ms linker for you, that's all.
It is unreasonable to pull in the many GBs of Visual
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:33:48 UTC, AB wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:06:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
DMD can generate 64-bit object files just fine, you only need
to link them, and DMD can invoke ms linker for you, that's all.
It is unreasonable to pull in the many GBs of Visual
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:51:39 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
Now there is
http://landinghub.visualstudio.com/visual-cpp-build-tools,
perhaps we should be encouraging using that instead?
It's still 3gb, so one might want to delete unneeded stuff after
installation, like arm tools and cross
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:33:48 UTC, AB wrote:
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:06:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
DMD can generate 64-bit object files just fine, you only need
to link them, and DMD can invoke ms linker for you, that's all.
It is unreasonable to pull in the many GBs of Visual
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 09:06:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
DMD can generate 64-bit object files just fine, you only need
to link them, and DMD can invoke ms linker for you, that's all.
It is unreasonable to pull in the many GBs of Visual Studio as a
dependency only to use its 64-bit linker.
On Monday, 14 November 2016 at 08:38:32 UTC, AB wrote:
This is ridiculous, what does Visual Studio have to do with DMD
and its capability to generate 64-bit code?
DMD can generate 64-bit object files just fine, you only need to
link them, and DMD can invoke ms linker for you, that's all.
On 14/11/2016 9:38 PM, AB wrote:
Installing D 2.072.0 on Windows 7 64-bit. After installation is complete
I get the following two error (warning?) messages, screenshots here:
http://imgur.com/a/5fydB
For your convenience they read as follows:
"Could not detect Visual Studio (2008-2015 are
Installing D 2.072.0 on Windows 7 64-bit. After installation is
complete I get the following two error (warning?) messages,
screenshots here:
http://imgur.com/a/5fydB
For your convenience they read as follows:
"Could not detect Visual Studio (2008-2015 are supported). No
64-bit support."
53 matches
Mail list logo
