digitalmars.D - 0.999
- G.Vidal (12/15) May 25 2005 BTW,
- John Reimer (21/43) May 25 2005 Here we go again... not.
- G.Vidal (1/1) May 26 2005 Blablabla...
- John Reimer (2/5) May 26 2005 :-D .... Yeah, you're right!
- Brad Beveridge (18/40) May 25 2005 IMHO, D is moving slowly at the moment _because_ it is approaching 1.0,
- Charlie (15/35) May 25 2005 Yea blame GCC for that one ;). But it isn't a simple project, compilers...
- imr1984 (2/2) May 26 2005 Yo Charlie, why did you halt work on DIDE? I thought that it had great p...
- imr1984 (2/4) May 26 2005
- clayasaurus (6/27) May 25 2005 No, or hopefully not. D 1.0 will be released when all the bugs and kinks...
- Craig Black (8/23) May 26 2005 Please don't try to pressure Walter to open source the back end. If Wal...
Le Tue, 24 May 2005 16:23:35 -0400, Ben Hinkle a écrit : (fwd from NEAT)Maybe Walter will consider this for 1.0. Maybe he'll consider it for 2.0. Maybe he'll do it for 0.126. Who knows... My guess would be it belongs in the post 1.0 bucket.BTW, Do we have to wait the 0.999 version to expect the 1.0 release ? In my opinion, D is absolutely great, and Walter did a wonderful job, but the only thing I regret is that I think it's a too personal project, I mean things are going too slowly. The D frontend is GPL, but the source is totally impossible to understand, I tried several times, so basically nobody can help, and make some testing forks. We'd also need a small open source linux backend, the GCC one is way too heavy and complicated. Why not to make the backend open source, what's wrong with that ?
May 25 2005
G.Vidal wrote:Le Tue, 24 May 2005 16:23:35 -0400, Ben Hinkle a écrit : (fwd from NEAT)Here we go again... not. This is one of those topics that repeatedly pops back up. I've exhausted my own feelings on it in many prior posts... many of which probably were best left unposted. Now I prefer to just stand back, do what I can do in my little part of the world, and let the rest fall where it may. There doesn't seem to be any way of changing the way things will go with D. You either like it or leave it. If you like it, you take it as far as you can go and, once you hit the wall, you put as much pressure on Walter as possible... preferably using a jiu jitsu joint lock submission. If he squawks, you've succeeded a little -- although, he's a slippery fellow in matches and rarely can be pinned down. If he taps-out and puts in the feature, then wow! You win. There are a few heavy-weight champs in this forum that have succeeded in this regard -- but not very many: Walter crushes most of them with some devious secret art-form that no one has been able to figure out. Or you can just give up. Either way, we just kind of appreciate what he's done win or lose and relinquish our own huge D aspirations. :-) -JJRMaybe Walter will consider this for 1.0. Maybe he'll consider it for 2.0. Maybe he'll do it for 0.126. Who knows... My guess would be it belongs in the post 1.0 bucket.BTW, Do we have to wait the 0.999 version to expect the 1.0 release ? In my opinion, D is absolutely great, and Walter did a wonderful job, but the only thing I regret is that I think it's a too personal project, I mean things are going too slowly. The D frontend is GPL, but the source is totally impossible to understand, I tried several times, so basically nobody can help, and make some testing forks. We'd also need a small open source linux backend, the GCC one is way too heavy and complicated. Why not to make the backend open source, what's wrong with that ?
May 25 2005
John Reimer <brk_6502 yahoo.com> G.Vidal wrote:Blablabla...:-D .... Yeah, you're right!
May 26 2005
G.Vidal wrote:Le Tue, 24 May 2005 16:23:35 -0400, Ben Hinkle a écrit : (fwd from NEAT)IMHO, D is moving slowly at the moment _because_ it is approaching 1.0, features are being frozen and bugs are getting squashed. I've often heard it said that with software, the last 10% of the project always takes 50% of the time :) Why do you think that the GCC backend is too heavy & complicated? GCC is the standard compiler suite for most/all free software, attaching the D frontend to the GCC backend makes a lot of sense. The GCC backend provides multiple architecture code generation and decent code optimizers - man years worth of effort, I don't think that should be thrown away lightly. Although I have always built GDC myself, I think that there are binaries out there that someone is maintaining. The real trick would be to get the GCC mainline group to accept D as an official frontent. I suspect that Walter won't open source the backend, after all his C/C++ compilers use that backend & he presumably wants to sell his own D compiler at some stage. BradMaybe Walter will consider this for 1.0. Maybe he'll consider it for 2.0. Maybe he'll do it for 0.126. Who knows... My guess would be it belongs in the post 1.0 bucket.BTW, Do we have to wait the 0.999 version to expect the 1.0 release ? In my opinion, D is absolutely great, and Walter did a wonderful job, but the only thing I regret is that I think it's a too personal project, I mean things are going too slowly. The D frontend is GPL, but the source is totally impossible to understand, I tried several times, so basically nobody can help, and make some testing forks. We'd also need a small open source linux backend, the GCC one is way too heavy and complicated. Why not to make the backend open source, what's wrong with that ?
May 25 2005
The D frontend is GPL, but the source is totally impossible to understand, I tried several times, so basically nobody can help, and make some testing forks.A few of us use the front-end alot for things, did you have any specific questions about it ?We'd also need a small open source linux backend, the GCC one is way too heavy and complicated.Yea blame GCC for that one ;). But it isn't a simple project, compilers are pretty complex beasts , and GCC is probably more complicated by the fact that its set up to run on lots of different arictechtures. I for one am super greatful for GDC , I think for D to succeed it the long run it will definetly need a GCC implementation. There's also a project on dsource aimed at making a multi-platform compiler you might check out. Cheers, Charlie "G.Vidal" <gyvidal wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:pan.2005.05.25.17.12.50.574126 wanadoo.fr...Le Tue, 24 May 2005 16:23:35 -0400, Ben Hinkle a écrit : (fwd from NEAT)2.0.Maybe Walter will consider this for 1.0. Maybe he'll consider it forinMaybe he'll do it for 0.126. Who knows... My guess would be it belongsthe post 1.0 bucket.BTW, Do we have to wait the 0.999 version to expect the 1.0 release ? In my opinion, D is absolutely great, and Walter did a wonderful job, but the only thing I regret is that I think it's a too personal project, I mean things are going too slowly. The D frontend is GPL, but the source is totally impossible to understand, I tried several times, so basically nobody can help, and make some testing forks. We'd also need a small open source linux backend, the GCC one is way too heavy and complicated. Why not to make the backend open source, what's wrong with that ?
May 25 2005
Yo Charlie, why did you halt work on DIDE? I thought that it had great potential and I was very upset when i heard it was discontinued :(
May 26 2005
never mind, i found that about elephant... silly me. In article <d747h9$26lo$1 digitaldaemon.com>, imr1984 says...Yo Charlie, why did you halt work on DIDE? I thought that it had great potential and I was very upset when i heard it was discontinued :(
May 26 2005
G.Vidal wrote:Le Tue, 24 May 2005 16:23:35 -0400, Ben Hinkle a écrit : (fwd from NEAT)No, or hopefully not. D 1.0 will be released when all the bugs and kinks are worked out, this could be at a version .150, .140, or whenever.Maybe Walter will consider this for 1.0. Maybe he'll consider it for 2.0. Maybe he'll do it for 0.126. Who knows... My guess would be it belongs in the post 1.0 bucket.BTW, Do we have to wait the 0.999 version to expect the 1.0 release ?In my opinion, D is absolutely great, and Walter did a wonderful job, but the only thing I regret is that I think it's a too personal project, I mean things are going too slowly.What's the rush?The D frontend is GPL, but the source is totally impossible to understand, I tried several times, so basically nobody can help, and make some testing forks. We'd also need a small open source linux backend, the GCC one is way too heavy and complicated. Why not to make the backend open source, what's wrong with that?Imagine the D backend was open sourced, then you discover the code is as understandable as the front end code and as complicated as gcc.
May 25 2005
Please don't try to pressure Walter to open source the back end. If Walter wants to make money on a project that he has devoted a number of years of his life to, then more power to him. A steady stream of revenue can only improve the quality of the product. I hope Walter makes big $$$. -Craig "G.Vidal" <gyvidal wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:pan.2005.05.25.17.12.50.574126 wanadoo.fr...Le Tue, 24 May 2005 16:23:35 -0400, Ben Hinkle a écrit : (fwd from NEAT)Maybe Walter will consider this for 1.0. Maybe he'll consider it for 2.0. Maybe he'll do it for 0.126. Who knows... My guess would be it belongs in the post 1.0 bucket.BTW, Do we have to wait the 0.999 version to expect the 1.0 release ? In my opinion, D is absolutely great, and Walter did a wonderful job, but the only thing I regret is that I think it's a too personal project, I mean things are going too slowly. The D frontend is GPL, but the source is totally impossible to understand, I tried several times, so basically nobody can help, and make some testing forks. We'd also need a small open source linux backend, the GCC one is way too heavy and complicated. Why not to make the backend open source, what's wrong with that ?
May 26 2005