Am Sat, 24 May 2014 21:32:04 +0200
schrieb Sönke Ludwig slud...@rejectedsoftware.com:
* It may also be a good step to solve the chicken-egg issue here, where
the argument is that because SDL isn't so common, it shouldn't be used.
I think it's a really nice little format that deserves to get
On 24/05/2014 17:42, Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com mailto:digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Original thread :
http://forum.rejectedsoftware.__com/groups/rejectedsoftware.__dub/thread/2/
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 18:03:16 UTC, Jeremy Powers via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Dub (code.dlang.org) has emerged as the standard build tool for
D. Yet
there doesn't look to be any mention of it on the D site
proper...
Would it be reasonable to include dub with the DMD installer?
Or
Am 23.05.2014 08:24, schrieb Jacob Carlborg:
On 22/05/14 21:11, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not holding
anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you need done/dealt-with
regarding SDLang-D, let me know.
No, SDLang-D is absolutely fine,
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Original thread : http://forum.rejectedsoftware.
com/groups/rejectedsoftware.dub/thread/2/
Summary by Sonke: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/dub/wiki/Sdl-
based-package-format-draft
Thanks.
On Saturday, 24 May 2014 at 16:42:32 UTC, Jeremy Powers via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Original thread : http://forum.rejectedsoftware.
com/groups/rejectedsoftware.dub/thread/2/
Summary by Sonke:
On 5/24/2014 12:42 PM, Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Original thread : http://forum.rejectedsoftware.
com/groups/rejectedsoftware.dub/thread/2/
Summary by Sonke:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Nobody has said anything about removing JSON support. It's been stated
that JSON support is *staying* as an option. SDL will merely be the
recommended format.
Yes - my point is that moving
On 5/24/2014 10:15 AM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
Am 23.05.2014 08:24, schrieb Jacob Carlborg:
On 22/05/14 21:11, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not holding
anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you need done/dealt-with
regarding SDLang-D, let me
On Saturday, 24 May 2014 at 17:30:54 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 5/24/2014 12:42 PM, Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Original thread : http://forum.rejectedsoftware.
On 5/24/2014 1:54 PM, Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Nobody has said anything about removing JSON support. It's been stated
that JSON support is *staying* as an option. SDL will
Am 24.05.2014 20:34, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On 5/24/2014 1:54 PM, Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Nobody has said anything about removing JSON support. It's been stated
that JSON
Am 24.05.2014 19:51, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
But maybe I should put a std.sdlang through the phobos review queue to
help getting DUB into the standard DMD releases?
Not sure if that would be really considered necessary, but I wouldn't
mind that for sure in general* (I think it should be
On 22/05/14 21:11, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not holding
anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you need done/dealt-with
regarding SDLang-D, let me know.
Do we want/need the SDL parser/writer to be included into Phobos first?
--
what it the reason to change json to SDL?
On 23/05/14 08:33, Suliman wrote:
what it the reason to change json to SDL?
Less verbose.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 09:09:51 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 23/05/14 08:33, Suliman wrote:
what it the reason to change json to SDL?
Less verbose.
And it supports comments in not-an-ugly-way!
---
Paolo
On 5/23/14, Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 23/05/14 08:33, Suliman wrote:
what it the reason to change json to SDL?
Less verbose.
And hopefully less problems with trailing commas.
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 19:50:51 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
Yeah Sonke contributions to community are beyond any
imagination already. She should push for him and move forward
(assuming he is ok with it ;))
I agree. I have a project (and even handed in a paper about it*)
based on vibe.d. It was
On 23/05/14 08:33, Suliman wrote:
what it the reason to change json to SDL?
Less verbose.
Can you elaborate? I find JSON to be precisely the right verbosity -
enough to be human readable, not too much.
Is the decision to switch documented/discussed somewhere? It seems
unnecessary to
Original thread :
http://forum.rejectedsoftware.com/groups/rejectedsoftware.dub/thread/2/
Summary by Sonke:
https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/dub/wiki/Sdl-based-package-format-draft
As there seem to be some objections I did not expect before we
can go with another run of discussion with
On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 06:24:28 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 22/05/14 21:11, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not
holding
anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you need
done/dealt-with
regarding SDLang-D, let me know.
Do we want/need
On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 14:43:20 UTC, Kiith-Sa wrote:
On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 06:24:28 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 22/05/14 21:11, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not
holding
anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you need
On 5/23/2014 10:35 AM, Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 23/05/14 08:33, Suliman wrote:
what it the reason to change json to SDL?
Less verbose.
Can you elaborate? I find JSON to be precisely the right verbosity -
enough to be human readable, not too much.
Is the decision to
Dub (code.dlang.org) has emerged as the standard build tool for D. Yet
there doesn't look to be any mention of it on the D site proper...
Would it be reasonable to include dub with the DMD installer? Or failing
that, at least feature it prominently (or at all) on the tools page of
dlang.org?
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 18:03:16 UTC, Jeremy Powers via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Dub (code.dlang.org) has emerged as the standard build tool for
D. Yet
there doesn't look to be any mention of it on the D site
proper...
Would it be reasonable to include dub with the DMD installer?
Or
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 18:03:16 UTC, Jeremy Powers via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Dub (code.dlang.org) has emerged as the standard build tool for
D. Yet
there doesn't look to be any mention of it on the D site
proper...
Would it be reasonable to include dub with the DMD installer?
Or
On 2014-05-22 2:03 PM, Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Dub (code.dlang.org http://code.dlang.org) has emerged as the standard
build tool for D. Yet there doesn't look to be any mention of it on the
D site proper...
Would it be reasonable to include dub with the DMD installer? Or
On 5/22/14, 11:03 AM, Jeremy Powers via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Dub (code.dlang.org http://code.dlang.org) has emerged as the standard
build tool for D. Yet there doesn't look to be any mention of it on the
D site proper...
Would it be reasonable to include dub with the DMD installer? Or
failing
On 5/22/2014 2:06 PM, Dicebot wrote:
Main blocker is transition to SDL as default project
description format
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not holding
anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you need done/dealt-with
regarding SDLang-D, let me know.
On 2014-05-22 3:11 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 5/22/2014 2:06 PM, Dicebot wrote:
Main blocker is transition to SDL as default project
description format
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not holding
anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you need done/dealt-with
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 19:11:50 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 5/22/2014 2:06 PM, Dicebot wrote:
Main blocker is transition to SDL as default project
description format
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not
holding anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 19:20:12 UTC, Etienne wrote:
On 2014-05-22 3:11 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 5/22/2014 2:06 PM, Dicebot wrote:
Main blocker is transition to SDL as default project
description format
Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not
holding
anything up
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 19:40:23 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 19:20:12 UTC, Etienne wrote:
On 2014-05-22 3:11 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 5/22/2014 2:06 PM, Dicebot wrote:
Main blocker is transition to SDL as default project
description format
Is there
34 matches
Mail list logo
