• Kyle Furlong (9/9) Sep 16 2005 I have seen a bunch of different efforts going into this and related
• pragma (12/23) Sep 21 2005 Actually, this is sort of what I'm attempting to do with DDL, without
• James Dunne (10/36) Sep 21 2005 But alas, what if what we already have is not enough? I'm not sure how
• pragma (28/48) Sep 21 2005 Between the D ABI and the D-Mangled exports on objects, you can pretty
• J C Calvarese (5/13) Sep 21 2005 It means that 2 + 2 = 5
• James Dunne (2/24) Sep 22 2005 Yeah, I always thought it was a useless, empty, business buzz-word.
• pragma (11/40) Sep 22 2005 Well, leave it to the businessspeak (tm) leaders of the former dot-com
• J C Calvarese (4/44) Sep 22 2005 Actually, I think synergy is a cool word and a useful concept.
• James Dunne (3/60) Sep 23 2005 Hey, don't knock paradigm shifts... Those are cool. But I agree,
• user domain.invalid (12/13) Sep 23 2005 From dictionary.com:

Kyle Furlong <kylefurlong gmail.com> writes:

I have seen a bunch of different efforts going into this and related 
issues, notably Eric's DDL, Burton's DigC, Ben's Dflect, and of course 
Derek's Build.

Why not pool the effort into a unified tool which could incorporate all 
this functionality with a standard output format which would support 
runtime symbol resolution, reflection, and all the fancy things that are 
so convenient. :-D

On the other hand a toolchain approach is also feasible, but that also 
means that yall would need to collaborate.

pragma <EricAnderton youknowthedrill.yahoo> writes:

Kyle Furlong wrote:
 I have seen a bunch of different efforts going into this and related 
 issues, notably Eric's DDL, Burton's DigC, Ben's Dflect, and of course 
 Derek's Build.
 
 Why not pool the effort into a unified tool which could incorporate all 
 this functionality with a standard output format which would support 
 runtime symbol resolution, reflection, and all the fancy things that are 
 so convenient. :-D
 
 On the other hand a toolchain approach is also feasible, but that also 
 means that yall would need to collaborate.

Actually, this is sort of what I'm attempting to do with DDL, without 
compounding the current situation further.  The approach to DDL is to 
embrace all the existing binary formats out there, without imposing any 
new ones on the developer/user.  In the end, it means getting the most 
of what we already have.

I agree that we need more synergy on these concepts.  However, where I'm 
strongest (working on DDL) is also where things are weakest: DDL will 
need to mature considerably before I can bring something of value to the 
table.

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo

James Dunne <james.jdunne gmail.com> writes:

pragma wrote:
 Kyle Furlong wrote:
 
 I have seen a bunch of different efforts going into this and related 
 issues, notably Eric's DDL, Burton's DigC, Ben's Dflect, and of course 
 Derek's Build.

 Why not pool the effort into a unified tool which could incorporate 
 all this functionality with a standard output format which would 
 support runtime symbol resolution, reflection, and all the fancy 
 things that are so convenient. :-D

 On the other hand a toolchain approach is also feasible, but that also 
 means that yall would need to collaborate.

 
 
 Actually, this is sort of what I'm attempting to do with DDL, without 
 compounding the current situation further.  The approach to DDL is to 
 embrace all the existing binary formats out there, without imposing any 
 new ones on the developer/user.  In the end, it means getting the most 
 of what we already have.

But alas, what if what we already have is not enough?  I'm not sure how 
much reflection information can be obtained from mangled names of D 
identifiers.  DMD needs header modules to link in static libraries, so 
it does not detect them ONLY from the specific binary executable format 
(ELF, PE, COFF, OMF).  Correct me if I'm wrong, somebody.

I should take a look at your DDL project to see what all is planned and 
what is already working.  I have glanced at it a few times, but never 
took the time to dig in far enough.

 
 I agree that we need more synergy on these concepts.  However, where I'm 
 strongest (working on DDL) is also where things are weakest: DDL will 
 need to mature considerably before I can bring something of value to the 
 table.
 

What does synergy mean?

pragma <EricAnderton youknowthedrill.yahoo> writes:

James Dunne wrote:
 pragma wrote:
 
 But alas, what if what we already have is not enough?  I'm not sure how 
 much reflection information can be obtained from mangled names of D 
 identifiers.  DMD needs header modules to link in static libraries, so 
 it does not detect them ONLY from the specific binary executable format 
 (ELF, PE, COFF, OMF).  Correct me if I'm wrong, somebody.

Between the D ABI and the D-Mangled exports on objects, you can pretty 
much nail down the location, type and callspec of nearly every aspect of 
the language.  What's missing is things that are quickly optmized away 
by the compiler like enums, aliases and some typedefs.

IMO, I'd much rather wait to see what Walter has in mind for his planned 
symbol file format before jumping to any conclusions about D's 
usefulness when it comes to binary files.

 
 I should take a look at your DDL project to see what all is planned and 
 what is already working.  I have glanced at it a few times, but never 
 took the time to dig in far enough.

The forum and code tree are light on details at the moment.  I'm 
currently assmembling a website to address this.  Plus, Trac support on 
dsource.org has been promised reatively soon.

In a nutshell, I'm trying to put D on par with Java with respect to 
runtime loading and linking of 'intermediate' files (they cease to be 
'intermediate' if this project succeeds).  Virtually everything else 
that comes from this project will be a side benefit to this core goal.

So far, I have an binary wrapper format (.DDL) that will ease porting as 
well as accelerate the planned linking process; the new 'bless' tool can 
be used to create these files.  As a library, the DDL kit has an OMF 
loader that works perfectly on DMD built binaries and has been tested 
against phobos.lib and various other .obj files.  Those qualities have 
been put to use in the 'ddlinfo' tool, which can be used in a manner 
similar to 'obj2asm'.

Outside all this, I can easily see a solid reflection interface falling 
out of this project, and possibly even an 'emit' interface to complement it.

 
 I agree that we need more synergy on these concepts.  However, where 
 I'm strongest (working on DDL) is also where things are weakest: DDL 
 will need to mature considerably before I can bring something of value 
 to the table.

 
 What does synergy mean?

It means just what you suggested: getting everything to work together in 
a way that befits all.

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo

J C Calvarese <technocrat7 gmail.com> writes:

In article <dgsg7i$1l5h$1 digitaldaemon.com>, James Dunne says...
pragma wrote:
 Kyle Furlong wrote:


..
 I agree that we need more synergy on these concepts.  However, where I'm 
 strongest (working on DDL) is also where things are weakest: DDL will 
 need to mature considerably before I can bring something of value to the 
 table.
 

What does synergy mean?

It means that 2 + 2 = 5

It's kind of like "new math". ;)

jcc7

James Dunne <james.jdunne gmail.com> writes:

J C Calvarese wrote:
 In article <dgsg7i$1l5h$1 digitaldaemon.com>, James Dunne says...
 
pragma wrote:

Kyle Furlong wrote:


 
 ..
 
I agree that we need more synergy on these concepts.  However, where I'm 
strongest (working on DDL) is also where things are weakest: DDL will 
need to mature considerably before I can bring something of value to the 
table.

What does synergy mean?

 
 
 It means that 2 + 2 = 5
 
 It's kind of like "new math". ;)
 
 jcc7

Yeah, I always thought it was a useless, empty, business buzz-word.

pragma <EricAnderton youknowthedrill.yahoo> writes:

James Dunne wrote:
 J C Calvarese wrote:
 
 In article <dgsg7i$1l5h$1 digitaldaemon.com>, James Dunne says...

 pragma wrote:

 Kyle Furlong wrote:



 ..

 I agree that we need more synergy on these concepts.  However, where 
 I'm strongest (working on DDL) is also where things are weakest: DDL 
 will need to mature considerably before I can bring something of 
 value to the table.

 What does synergy mean?



 It means that 2 + 2 = 5

 It's kind of like "new math". ;)

 jcc7

 
 
 Yeah, I always thought it was a useless, empty, business buzz-word.

Well, leave it to the businessspeak (tm) leaders of the former dot-com 
industry to kill a perfectly good word.  I'm sure many won the office 
pool during buzzword bingo on the strength of 'synergy', 'convergence' 
and 'leverage' alone.

Thanks for smacking me with a trout guys.  I'll try to stray from this 
kind of (content free) verbiage from now on.   Suffice it to say, I 
think Kyle has a very good point, as all these related D projects out 
there may very well work well when combined.  ;)

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo

J C Calvarese <technocrat7 gmail.com> writes:

In article <dgusmd$1m6b$1 digitaldaemon.com>, pragma says...
James Dunne wrote:
 J C Calvarese wrote:
 
 In article <dgsg7i$1l5h$1 digitaldaemon.com>, James Dunne says...

 pragma wrote:

 Kyle Furlong wrote:



 ..

 I agree that we need more synergy on these concepts.  However, where 
 I'm strongest (working on DDL) is also where things are weakest: DDL 
 will need to mature considerably before I can bring something of 
 value to the table.

 What does synergy mean?



 It means that 2 + 2 = 5

 It's kind of like "new math". ;)

 jcc7

 
 
 Yeah, I always thought it was a useless, empty, business buzz-word.

Well, leave it to the businessspeak (tm) leaders of the former dot-com 
industry to kill a perfectly good word.  I'm sure many won the office 
pool during buzzword bingo on the strength of 'synergy', 'convergence' 
and 'leverage' alone.

Thanks for smacking me with a trout guys.  I'll try to stray from this 
kind of (content free) verbiage from now on.   Suffice it to say, I 
think Kyle has a very good point, as all these related D projects out 
there may very well work well when combined.  ;)

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo

Actually, I think synergy is a cool word and a useful concept.

And it's a whole more helpful than a mission statement or a paradigm shift. ;)

jcc7

James Dunne <james.jdunne gmail.com> writes:

J C Calvarese wrote:
 In article <dgusmd$1m6b$1 digitaldaemon.com>, pragma says...
 
James Dunne wrote:

J C Calvarese wrote:


In article <dgsg7i$1l5h$1 digitaldaemon.com>, James Dunne says...


pragma wrote:


Kyle Furlong wrote:



..


I agree that we need more synergy on these concepts.  However, where 
I'm strongest (working on DDL) is also where things are weakest: DDL 
will need to mature considerably before I can bring something of 
value to the table.

What does synergy mean?



It means that 2 + 2 = 5

It's kind of like "new math". ;)

jcc7


Yeah, I always thought it was a useless, empty, business buzz-word.

Well, leave it to the businessspeak (tm) leaders of the former dot-com 
industry to kill a perfectly good word.  I'm sure many won the office 
pool during buzzword bingo on the strength of 'synergy', 'convergence' 
and 'leverage' alone.

Thanks for smacking me with a trout guys.  I'll try to stray from this 
kind of (content free) verbiage from now on.   Suffice it to say, I 
think Kyle has a very good point, as all these related D projects out 
there may very well work well when combined.  ;)

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo

 
 
 Actually, I think synergy is a cool word and a useful concept.
 
 And it's a whole more helpful than a mission statement or a paradigm shift. ;)
 
 jcc7

Hey, don't knock paradigm shifts... Those are cool.  But I agree, 
mission statements are fairly useless.

user domain.invalid writes:

James Dunne wrote:

 What does synergy mean?

 From dictionary.com:

syn·er·gy

    1.  The interaction of two or more agents or forces so that their 
combined effect is greater than the sum of their individual effects.
    2. Cooperative interaction among groups, especially among the 
acquired subsidiaries or merged parts of a corporation, that creates an 
enhanced combined effect.


This seems like a perfectly good word to describe the effect Eric is 
after. Just because business types have abused a word doesn't mean it 
should be abandoned by everyone else.

Dennis Cote