On 3/13/23 07:30, Joe wrote:
> whether DLang (the Foundation and/or the
> community) would consider working with the CMake and clang-format
> communities to get them to support D in their products
That would be great. I hope it will eventually happen.
I've used CMake on existing projects only
On Monday, 13 March 2023 at 13:58:29 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
I'm not particularly interested in defending dub - i consider
it a useless piece of crap that I only suffer through cuz some
users demanded it
For the record, I wasn't trying to attack dub (or dfmt). I was
more interested in
On Monday, 13 March 2023 at 13:32:04 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
The package registry is full of libraries, yes. That's what
it's primarily for. There aren't a lot of executables uploaded
there because they're usually better distributed in other ways.
But plenty of people are using dub to build
On Monday, 13 March 2023 at 13:20:21 UTC, Joe wrote:
Yeah, it seems like it's *only* for libraries (and a few
single-exe utilities). Looking at code.dlang.org, under
"Stand-alone applications/Server software", the top rated item
is "handy-httpd" which according to its dub.json builds a
On Monday, 13 March 2023 at 13:20:21 UTC, Joe wrote:
Yeah, it seems like it's *only* for libraries (and a few
single-exe utilities). Looking at code.dlang.org, under
"Stand-alone applications/Server software", the top rated item
is "handy-httpd" which according to its dub.json builds a
On Monday, 13 March 2023 at 12:56:57 UTC, Bradley Chatha wrote:
For better or for worse we're stuck with dub as the standard
package manager + build tool one-in-all for most of our open
source libraries.
Yeah, it seems like it's *only* for libraries (and a few
single-exe utilities). Looking
On Monday, 13 March 2023 at 10:52:11 UTC, Joe wrote:
months. Am I missing something on how to deal with
multi-executable projects in dub (and I can think of many such
projects)?
Dub isn't very good at doing more than relatively basic things
natively (which covers enough D projects for it to
