www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D - DMD 0.81 release

reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
Fixes build break in Ant's DUI.

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
Mar 07 2004
next sibling parent reply Ant <duitoolkit yahoo.ca> writes:
On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 13:56:05 -0800, Walter wrote:


 Fixes build break in Ant's DUI.


(not that we don't trust you;)

Yes it does! thank you!
I also confirmed the same name for module and class.

(this means I have to release a .81 aware version of DUI
(some implicit double to int were found).
DUI now (tomorrow) supports 
event callbaks through delegates)

Ant


 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
Mar 07 2004
parent reply Brad Anderson <brad sankaty.dot.com> writes:
 DUI now (tomorrow) supports 
 event callbaks through delegates)


And I'm looking forward to you bringing this expertise to our SWT port.  Were 
you able to check the code out via Subversion client?

BA
Mar 07 2004
parent Ant <duitoolkit yahoo.ca> writes:
On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:36:30 -0600, Brad Anderson wrote:


 DUI now (tomorrow) supports 
 event callbaks through delegates)


 
 And I'm looking forward to you bringing this expertise to our SWT port.  Were 
 you able to check the code out via Subversion client?
 
 BA


Yes, I have the code, didn't look at it yet...

Ant
Mar 07 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Julio_Jim=E9nez?= <jujibo inicia.es> writes:
Walter wrote:

 Fixes build break in Ant's DUI.
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
 
 
 


Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

regards

Julio
Mar 08 2004
parent reply imr1984 <imr1984_member pathlink.com> writes:
i agree. i have loads of dmd.zips around the place.

In article <c2hc5p$2c6n$1 digitaldaemon.com>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Julio_Jim=E9nez?=
says...

Walter wrote:

 Fixes build break in Ant's DUI.
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
 
 
 


Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

regards

Julio
Mar 08 2004
next sibling parent reply "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"imr1984" wrote in message...

 i agree. i have loads of dmd.zips around the place.


Normally when I download updated version of new software, I just
delete the old version.
(Sometime makeing sure the new one works first ^_^)

However, I does still have DMD v0.50 laying around somewhere :-D
It's not the earliest version I download but the the earliest that I
still have a copy of... I wonder what the earliest version of DMD
people still have ?

KTC
-- 
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
    - Heinrich Heine
Mar 08 2004
next sibling parent "sammy" <sammy.deroy sympatico.ca> writes:
"KTC" <me here.com> wrote in message news:c2i5cs$ndh$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 It's not the earliest version I download but the the earliest that I
 still have a copy of... I wonder what the earliest version of DMD
 people still have ?


D ALPHA Experimental release
www.digitalmars.com
Digital Mars D Compiler ALPHA v0.18
Copyright (c) 1999-2002 by Digital Mars written by Walter Bright
www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
Usage:
  dmd files.d ... { -switch }

  files.d        D source files
  -c             do not link
  -d             allow deprecated features
  -g             add symbolic debug info
  -gt            add trace profiling hooks
  -v             verbose
  -O             optimize
  -oobjdir       write .obj files to directory objdir
  -Ipath         where to look for imports
  -debug         compile in debug code
  -debug=level   compile in debug code <= level
  -debug=ident   compile in debug code identified by ident
  -release  compile release version
  -unittest      compile in unit tests
  -version=level compile in version code >= level
  -version=ident compile in version code identified by ident
Mar 08 2004
prev sibling parent "Phill" <phill pacific.net.au> writes:
You could alternativly save it as a different name.

Phill.


"KTC" <me here.com> wrote in message news:c2i5cs$ndh$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 "imr1984" wrote in message...

 i agree. i have loads of dmd.zips around the place.


 Normally when I download updated version of new software, I just
 delete the old version.
 (Sometime makeing sure the new one works first ^_^)

 However, I does still have DMD v0.50 laying around somewhere :-D
 It's not the earliest version I download but the the earliest that I
 still have a copy of... I wonder what the earliest version of DMD
 people still have ?

 KTC
 --
 Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
     - Heinrich Heine
Mar 09 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Juan C <Juan_member pathlink.com> writes:
Whenever I download one I add the version number myself -- dmd081.zip

In article <c2ho9r$30cr$1 digitaldaemon.com>, imr1984 says...

i agree. i have loads of dmd.zips around the place.

In article <c2hc5p$2c6n$1 digitaldaemon.com>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Julio_Jim=E9nez?=
says...

Walter wrote:

 Fixes build break in Ant's DUI.
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
 
 
 


Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

regards

Julio
Mar 08 2004
parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Julio_Jim=E9nez?= <jujibo inicia.es> writes:
Juan C wrote:

 Whenever I download one I add the version number myself -- dmd081.zip
 


...

I do it too. But how do you know that the version you are downloading is 
the right?..... by example if Walter forget upgrade the website... or 
there is a net problem... :-)

regards

Julio
Mar 08 2004
parent "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"Julio Jiménez" wrote...

 I do it too. But how do you know that the version you are


downloading is

 the right?..... by example if Walter forget upgrade the website...


or

 there is a net problem... :-)

 regards

 Julio


Yeah, had a problem like this few months ago when an assembler I'm
using was updated and put up on the website. However, when I go &
download it, it gave me the old thing. Turned out my ISP was caching
the old copy on their server and it wasn't updating properly. Had to
resort to rerouting my internet through my uni proxy to get the
updated version or else I would have had to wait for like another
couple of weeks (after I complained!).

To discover whether you've got the new version, of course you can just
type dmd to see what it says ;-)

KTC
-- 
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
    - Heinrich Heine
Mar 08 2004
prev sibling parent reply J Anderson <REMOVEanderson badmama.com.au> writes:
imr1984 wrote:


Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

regards

Julio
    




I'll point out one disadvantage of this idea: 

It makes it harder for automated updaters to find the most recent 
version of DMD.  Of course you could have two files or another file that 
has the latest update file location in it.

-- 
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/
Mar 09 2004
next sibling parent "C. Sauls" <ibisbasenji yahoo.com> writes:
J Anderson wrote:

 imr1984 wrote:
 

 Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

 dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

 regards

 Julio
   




 
 
 I'll point out one disadvantage of this idea:
 It makes it harder for automated updaters to find the most recent 
 version of DMD.  Of course you could have two files or another file that 
 has the latest update file location in it.
 


Simple: link file.  All hail POSIX filesystems.

-C. Sauls
-Invironz
Mar 09 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Julio_Jim=E9nez?= <jujibo inicia.es> writes:
J Anderson wrote:

 imr1984 wrote:
 

 Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

 dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

 regards

 Julio
   




 
 
 I'll point out one disadvantage of this idea:
 It makes it harder for automated updaters to find the most recent 
 version of DMD.  Of course you could have two files or another file that 
 has the latest update file location in it.
 


And... how do you know what is the mos recent version before download 
it? ... :-)
actually the filename is allways dmd.zip

regards

Julio
Mar 09 2004
parent reply J Anderson <REMOVEanderson badmama.com.au> writes:
Julio Jiménez wrote:


 J Anderson wrote:


 imr1984 wrote:


 Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

 dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

 regards

 Julio
   





 I'll point out one disadvantage of this idea:
 It makes it harder for automated updaters to find the most recent 
 version of DMD.  Of course you could have two files or another file 
 that has the latest update file location in it.


 And... how do you know what is the mos recent version before download 
 it? ... :-)
 actually the filename is allways dmd.zip

 regards

 Julio


Before, see the webpage. After check the date.  Actually I think it's 
possible to check the file date without downloading it.  For an 
automated file downloader simply checking the size normally works.

PS - Sorry everyone for sending to their email, the button in mozilla 
has changed locations and I'm not used to its position.

-- 
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/
Mar 09 2004
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Julio_Jim=E9nez?= <jujibo inicia.es> writes:
J Anderson wrote:

 Julio Jiménez wrote:
 

 J Anderson wrote:


 imr1984 wrote:


 Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

 dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

 regards

 Julio
   





 I'll point out one disadvantage of this idea:
 It makes it harder for automated updaters to find the most recent 
 version of DMD.  Of course you could have two files or another file 
 that has the latest update file location in it.


 And... how do you know what is the mos recent version before download 
 it? ... :-)
 actually the filename is allways dmd.zip

 regards

 Julio


 
 Before, see the webpage. After check the date.  Actually I think it's 
 possible to check the file date without downloading it.  For an 
 automated file downloader simply checking the size normally works.
 
 PS - Sorry everyone for sending to their email, the button in mozilla 
 has changed locations and I'm not used to its position.
 


Yes.. of course.. throw ftp to ditigitalmars.com you can see the date 
and test if it is newer than yours before download it.

But with version number in filename you can test the name and split the 
version number too... and really know that it is the version you want....

Really that's not a problem, only saying what I think about it... visit 
sourceforge.net all the projects (or almost all) have version number to 
follow it's changes in the time.

Regards.

Julio
Mar 09 2004
prev sibling parent Charles Hixson <charleshixsn earthlink.net> writes:
J Anderson wrote:

 imr1984 wrote:
 

 Would be good to write the version number in the zip file

 dmd.zip -> dmd-0.81.zip or something

 regards

 Julio
   




 
 
 I'll point out one disadvantage of this idea:
 It makes it harder for automated updaters to find the most recent 
 version of DMD.  Of course you could have two files or another file that 
 has the latest update file location in it.
 


If that's a serious problem, it's easily solved.  Merely have two files 
on the server.  One the latest version, with the number included (e.g., 
dmd-0.81.zip) and the other a simple link to it which provides you with 
a file named dmd.zip, which is actually constructed by sending the 
numbered version.  I'm rather sure that this is simple no matter which 
web server you are using.

OTOH, I'd be staisfied if it just said on the web page which file was 
being downloaded.  Say within a line of the download link.
Mar 09 2004
prev sibling parent reply C <dont respond.com> writes:
Is any of the stuff in /etc/c/stlsoft usable in D ?

And why is thier .cpp files in /etc/c/recls ?

C

On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 13:56:05 -0800, Walter <walter digitalmars.com> wrote=
:


 Fixes build break in Ant's DUI.

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html




-- =

Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Mar 10 2004
parent reply "Carlos Santander B." <carlos8294 msn.com> writes:
"C" <dont respond.com> wrote in message
news:opr4n2yke3ehmtou localhost
| Is any of the stuff in /etc/c/stlsoft usable in D ?
|
| And why is thier .cpp files in /etc/c/recls ?
|
| C
|

I have a question about phobos: what is it, exactly? I mean, is Phobos the D
runtime library for the DigitalMars compiler, or is it the D runtime
library? In other words, what parts of Phobos should be in every D compiler?

-----------------------
Carlos Santander Bernal
Mar 10 2004
parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Carlos Santander B." <carlos8294 msn.com> wrote in message
news:c2ok8u$efd$2 digitaldaemon.com...

 "C" <dont respond.com> wrote in message
 news:opr4n2yke3ehmtou localhost
 | Is any of the stuff in /etc/c/stlsoft usable in D ?
 |
 | And why is thier .cpp files in /etc/c/recls ?
 |
 | C
 |

 I have a question about phobos: what is it, exactly? I mean, is Phobos the


D

 runtime library for the DigitalMars compiler, or is it the D runtime
 library? In other words, what parts of Phobos should be in every D


compiler?

The parts of phobos in std should be in every D compiler, the parts in etc
are optional.
Mar 11 2004
parent reply "Carlos Santander B." <carlos8294 msn.com> writes:
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:c2pdlv$1oms$1 digitaldaemon.com
| The parts of phobos in std should be in every D compiler,
| the parts in etc are optional.

That's what I thought. But what about std.recls and std.windows.registry?
According to their license, they're property of Synesis Software. It just
seems a bit odd to me to have something like that as part as the standard
library.

-----------------------
Carlos Santander Bernal
Mar 11 2004
parent reply Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
Carlos Santander B. wrote:


 "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:c2pdlv$1oms$1 digitaldaemon.com
 | The parts of phobos in std should be in every D compiler,
 | the parts in etc are optional.
 
 That's what I thought. But what about std.recls and std.windows.registry?
 According to their license, they're property of Synesis Software. It just
 seems a bit odd to me to have something like that as part as the standard
 library.


Well, either the new compiler vendor would have to make a deal with 
Matthew (Synesis) or reimplement the API.

Lars Ivar Igesund
Mar 11 2004
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sigbj=F8rn_Lund_Olsen?= <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> writes:
Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:


 Carlos Santander B. wrote:
 

 "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:c2pdlv$1oms$1 digitaldaemon.com
 | The parts of phobos in std should be in every D compiler,
 | the parts in etc are optional.

 That's what I thought. But what about std.recls and std.windows.registry?
 According to their license, they're property of Synesis Software. It just
 seems a bit odd to me to have something like that as part as the standard
 library.


 
 
 Well, either the new compiler vendor would have to make a deal with 
 Matthew (Synesis) or reimplement the API.
 
 Lars Ivar Igesund


And that would happen.

Cheers,
Sigbjørn Lund Olsen

(Beware: This message contains irony.)
Mar 12 2004