On 2012-09-10 23:11, Walter Bright wrote:
What I have is VS 2010 Professional.
Oh, you see, guess I was wrong.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 14:11:36 -0700, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/9/2012 11:29 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-09-09 23:37, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/9/2012 1:56 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any particular version requirements on MSVC? Or too early to tell?
Beats me. I just bought VC and am
On 9/9/2012 11:29 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-09-09 23:37, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/9/2012 1:56 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any particular version requirements on MSVC? Or too early to tell?
Beats me. I just bought VC and am making it work with that.
Since you just bought it, and the
On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 23:29:53 -0700, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-09-09 23:37, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/9/2012 1:56 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any particular version requirements on MSVC? Or too early to tell?
Beats me. I just bought VC and am making it work with that.
Since you just bou
Am 10.09.2012 10:35, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 9/10/2012 12:56 AM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Hm, a major showstopper for the current DLL support ist, that dmd does
not
generate code to correctly import data symbols.
What is the bugzilla entry for that?
Its a pretty old ticket,
Rainer Schulze i
On 9/10/2012 12:56 AM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Hm, a major showstopper for the current DLL support ist, that dmd does not
generate code to correctly import data symbols.
What is the bugzilla entry for that?
Am 10.09.2012 09:07, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 9/9/2012 10:07 PM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Am 09.09.2012 23:37, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 9/9/2012 1:56 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any particular version requirements on MSVC? Or too early to tell?
Beats me. I just bought VC and am making it work
On 9/9/2012 10:07 PM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Am 09.09.2012 23:37, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 9/9/2012 1:56 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any particular version requirements on MSVC? Or too early to tell?
Beats me. I just bought VC and am making it work with that.
Are we going to get propper Dl
On 2012-09-09 23:37, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/9/2012 1:56 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any particular version requirements on MSVC? Or too early to tell?
Beats me. I just bought VC and am making it work with that.
Since you just bought it, and the latest version seems to be 2012, I
would gue
Am 09.09.2012 23:37, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 9/9/2012 1:56 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any particular version requirements on MSVC? Or too early to tell?
Beats me. I just bought VC and am making it work with that.
Are we going to get propper Dll support? I mean importing data symbols
and
On 9/9/2012 1:56 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any particular version requirements on MSVC? Or too early to tell?
Beats me. I just bought VC and am making it work with that.
On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 13:35:19 -0700
Walter Bright wrote:
> On 9/9/2012 1:20 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > Sorry if this was answered in a previous thread, but how does it
> > work with linking and object file formats?
>
>
> Dmd Win64 uses MS-Coff and Microsoft's linker and VC's runtime
> librar
On 9/9/2012 1:20 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Sorry if this was answered in a previous thread, but how does it work
with linking and object file formats?
Dmd Win64 uses MS-Coff and Microsoft's linker and VC's runtime libraries.
On Sat, 08 Sep 2012 17:35:12 -0700
Walter Bright wrote:
> D1 now compiles Phobos1 completely, and gets all the way to main()
> without crashing, and shuts down without crashing.
>
> (Why D1 first? Because it's much simpler to port than D2's
> druntime/phobos.)
Sorry if this was answered in a pr
On 9/9/2012 9:51 AM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Sunday, 9 September 2012 at 00:35:36 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
D1 now compiles Phobos1 completely, and gets all the way to main() without
crashing, and shuts down without crashing.
(Why D1 first? Because it's much simpler to port than D2's druntime/pho
On 9/9/2012 4:40 AM, Nicholas Londey wrote:
Nice work. Am very much looking forward to Win64 support in D2. :)
So am I!
On Sunday, 9 September 2012 at 00:35:36 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
D1 now compiles Phobos1 completely, and gets all the way to
main() without crashing, and shuts down without crashing.
(Why D1 first? Because it's much simpler to port than D2's
druntime/phobos.)
Very good news. Will it compile
Walter Bright wrote:
D1 now compiles Phobos1 completely, and gets all the way to
main() without crashing, and shuts down without crashing.
Nice!
On 09/09/2012 1:35 am, Walter Bright wrote:
D1 now compiles Phobos1 completely, and gets all the way to main()
without crashing, and shuts down without crashing.
(Why D1 first? Because it's much simpler to port than D2's
druntime/phobos.)
Awesome!
Nice work. Am very much looking forward to Win64 support in D2. :)
On 2012-09-09 02:35, Walter Bright wrote:
D1 now compiles Phobos1 completely, and gets all the way to main()
without crashing, and shuts down without crashing.
(Why D1 first? Because it's much simpler to port than D2's
druntime/phobos.)
Wow, that's amazing :)
--
/Jacob Carlborg
Congrats!
On 9/9/12, Walter Bright wrote:
> D1 now compiles Phobos1 completely, and gets all the way to main() without
> crashing, and shuts down without crashing.
>
> (Why D1 first? Because it's much simpler to port than D2's
> druntime/phobos.)
>
D1 now compiles Phobos1 completely, and gets all the way to main() without
crashing, and shuts down without crashing.
(Why D1 first? Because it's much simpler to port than D2's druntime/phobos.)
23 matches
Mail list logo
