www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Time to release 1.0

reply cletuspaul <cletuspaul_member pathlink.com> writes:
D seems sufficiently mature that a Release 1.0 should be finalized now, rather
than waiting to iron out all of the little kinks.

Many other languages started life as rough and messy hatchlings, only to mature
later.  Pascal did not get wings until Borlad invested time and resources on it.
So it is time for a Release 1.0 -- later on we can remove the warts and pimples.
Feb 08 2006
next sibling parent reply nick <nick.atamas gmail.com> writes:
cletuspaul wrote:

 D seems sufficiently mature that a Release 1.0 should be finalized now, rather
 than waiting to iron out all of the little kinks.
 
 Many other languages started life as rough and messy hatchlings, only to mature
 later.  Pascal did not get wings until Borlad invested time and resources on
it.
 So it is time for a Release 1.0 -- later on we can remove the warts and
pimples.
 


I think that before a 1.0 is released, the D online presence needs to be 
cleaned up a bit. Ideally, there would be one site that people could go 
to and easily get started with D. That means the site would have to be 
entirely dedicated to D, easy to follow, pleasant to look at, with no 
duplicated or rendunant/inconsistent information, etc. A second site 
would be dedicated to projects (dsource.org already exists but needs to 
be cleaned up).

There would also need to be a D package with most of the necessary items 
in it. Perhaps even an installer. At the very least, a list of 
D-endorsed tools would be available (with download links).


So until all that is done, I don't think it's time to release 1.0.
Feb 08 2006
next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
nick wrote:


 There would also need to be a D package with most of the necessary items 
 in it. Perhaps even an installer. At the very least, a list of 
 D-endorsed tools would be available (with download links).


I plan on releasing installers for GDC (the "GNU D Compiler")
Already done for Mac and Linux, but will do for MinGW as well.

Walter does not want to do it for DMD (for Windows and Linux),
and due to the non-distribute license nobody else can either.

GDC is released under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
My builds are all aimed at using the system "gcc" and "g++".

--anders


PS.
See http://gdcmac.sourceforge.net (Mac OS X) and
     http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/gdc.spec (SRPM)

Target platforms: Mac OS X 10.3, Mac OS X 10.4
                   Fedora Core 1, Fedora Core 4
                   Windows XP with MinGW / MSYS
Feb 09 2006
next sibling parent reply Dave <Dave_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <dsf05n$t8j$1 digitaldaemon.com>,
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= says...

nick wrote:


 There would also need to be a D package with most of the necessary items 
 in it. Perhaps even an installer. At the very least, a list of 
 D-endorsed tools would be available (with download links).


I plan on releasing installers for GDC (the "GNU D Compiler")
Already done for Mac and Linux, but will do for MinGW as well.

Walter does not want to do it for DMD (for Windows and Linux),
and due to the non-distribute license nobody else can either.

GDC is released under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
My builds are all aimed at using the system "gcc" and "g++".

--anders


PS.
See http://gdcmac.sourceforge.net (Mac OS X) and
     http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/gdc.spec (SRPM)

Target platforms: Mac OS X 10.3, Mac OS X 10.4
                   Fedora Core 1, Fedora Core 4
                   Windows XP with MinGW / MSYS


Will this XP installer allow users to compile/run directly from a windows
'command prompt' w/o having to open a MinGW or MSYS 'shell'?

If not, does DJGPP allow for that and (if so) what would be the chances of
something like that happening?

Thanks,

- Dave
Feb 09 2006
parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Dave wrote:


I plan on releasing installers for GDC (the "GNU D Compiler")
Already done for Mac and Linux, but will do for MinGW as well.





 Will this XP installer allow users to compile/run directly from a windows
 'command prompt' w/o having to open a MinGW or MSYS 'shell'?


I had only planned to do one for the GNU environment (i.e. MSYS)
But I *think* that it could work for both ? (I'm not a Win expert)

Wanted MinGW for the other tools, like bash and make and gcc etc.

--anders
Feb 09 2006
parent Bruno Medeiros <daiphoenixNO SPAMlycos.com> writes:
Anders F Björklund wrote:

 Dave wrote:
 

 I plan on releasing installers for GDC (the "GNU D Compiler")
 Already done for Mac and Linux, but will do for MinGW as well.




 

 Will this XP installer allow users to compile/run directly from a windows
 'command prompt' w/o having to open a MinGW or MSYS 'shell'?


 
 I had only planned to do one for the GNU environment (i.e. MSYS)
 But I *think* that it could work for both ? (I'm not a Win expert)
 


I started wondering myself how this works. It think there is no problem, 
you can run gcc (and presumably gdc too) on a windows cmd shell, the 
only difference is that in the cmd shell there is no conversion from 
POSIX paths to win32 paths.
What is strange, is that that conversion is not made only for the MinGW 
programs, as it is made for the MSYS programs (there are a bin directory 
for each of these). For example:
   > gcc /c/test.c
won't ever work, but this will:
   > cat /c/test.c
as cat will understand the path as 'C:\test.c' .
Seems the MSYS programs are linked together with a msys.dll that does 
that work, though why is it that MinGW is not the same, I don't know.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - CS/E student
"Certain aspects of D are a pathway to many abilities some consider to 
be... unnatural."
Feb 10 2006
prev sibling parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Anders F Björklund wrote:
<snip>

 Walter does not want to do it for DMD (for Windows and Linux),
 and due to the non-distribute license nobody else can either.


<snip>

Does DMD really need an installer?  Opening a .zip file and extracting 
its contents isn't that difficult an operation.

Stewart.

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M d- s:- C++  a->--- UB  P+ L E  W++  N+++ o K-  w++  O? M V? PS- 
PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Feb 10 2006
next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Stewart Gordon wrote:


 Walter does not want to do it for DMD (for Windows and Linux),
 and due to the non-distribute license nobody else can either.


 
 Does DMD really need an installer?  Opening a .zip file and extracting 
 its contents isn't that difficult an operation.


I dunno...

I've found that the Linux RPM helps with upgrades, and some people
like an EXE installer as it sets up the PATH for you and so on...

I provide both a PKG and a ZIP for GDC/Mac, and there people prefer the
Installer (wizard) variant) I think DMD could use both too ? (EXE/ZIP)

Might try making one with NSIS, as I'm trying to learn that anyway.
But the general sentiment has been that the DMD ZIP is "good enough".

--anders
Feb 10 2006
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
 I provide both a PKG and a ZIP for GDC/Mac, and there people prefer the
 Installer (wizard) variant) I think DMD could use both too ? (EXE/ZIP)
 
 Might try making one with NSIS, as I'm trying to learn that anyway.


No, that wasn't exactly hard... Ended up half the zip size, as well.
Setup screenshots at: http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd-setup.html

It just unpacks the files in C:\dmd and adds c:\dmd\bin to the path.
(could use some smarts, to avoid zapping any existing config files)

Not being able to post the result/exe kinda defeats the whole point,
but this will work nicely on Windows for GDC (which is distributable).

Needs an extra installer for DMC 8.47, and some .NSI script cleanup,
but other than that it should be good to go... Will post it later.

--anders

PS. Switched from Inno Setup, since the resulting EXE is much smaller.
     It's all scripted, so you only need to change the version numbers.
Feb 10 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Dave <Dave_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <dshpvp$m1g$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Stewart Gordon says...

Anders F Björklund wrote:
<snip>

 Walter does not want to do it for DMD (for Windows and Linux),
 and due to the non-distribute license nobody else can either.


<snip>

Does DMD really need an installer?  Opening a .zip file and extracting 
its contents isn't that difficult an operation.


Yes; IMHO, this would help adoptation a lot (on Windows and other platforms). 

Probably Walter doesn't want to do this until 1.0 since it would just be another
step in the development/release cycle?


Stewart.
Feb 10 2006
prev sibling parent reply "Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dshpvp$m1g$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Anders F Björklund wrote:
 <snip>

 Walter does not want to do it for DMD (for Windows and Linux),
 and due to the non-distribute license nobody else can either.


 <snip>

 Does DMD really need an installer?  Opening a .zip file and extracting its
 contents isn't that difficult an operation.


I personally don't like installers - not because they do a bad job, but 
because
I never know *what* they're doing to my system. Are they mucking with the
registry? Installing spyware? Replacing uptodate drivers with older, buggy
versions? Phoning home?

With zip files, I can see what's going to happen, and my unzipper isn't
going to execute any code from the archive.

In keeping with avoiding an installer, dmd is designed to not require any
registry entries, environment variable edits, or even having the PATH set.
Uninstall is as easy as just blowing away the directory it's installed in.
Feb 10 2006
next sibling parent F <F_member pathlink.com> writes:
Very good approach. As a regular (limited) user on a corporate PC, I know it is
very difficult to install something, but you can unzip...
However, others could like installers exactly because they create shortcuts,
update path etc.
Maybe having both?

F



In article <dsir7e$1meh$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dshpvp$m1g$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Anders F Björklund wrote:
 <snip>

 Walter does not want to do it for DMD (for Windows and Linux),
 and due to the non-distribute license nobody else can either.


 <snip>

 Does DMD really need an installer?  Opening a .zip file and extracting its
 contents isn't that difficult an operation.


I personally don't like installers - not because they do a bad job, but 
because
I never know *what* they're doing to my system. Are they mucking with the
registry? Installing spyware? Replacing uptodate drivers with older, buggy
versions? Phoning home?

With zip files, I can see what's going to happen, and my unzipper isn't
going to execute any code from the archive.

In keeping with avoiding an installer, dmd is designed to not require any
registry entries, environment variable edits, or even having the PATH set.
Uninstall is as easy as just blowing away the directory it's installed in.
Feb 10 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply =?iso-8859-1?q?Knud_S=F8rensen?= <12tkvvb02 sneakemail.com> writes:
 
 I personally don't like installers - not because they do a bad job, but 
 because
 I never know *what* they're doing to my system. Are they mucking with the
 registry? Installing spyware? Replacing uptodate drivers with older, buggy
 versions? Phoning home?
 
 With zip files, I can see what's going to happen, and my unzipper isn't
 going to execute any code from the archive.
 
 In keeping with avoiding an installer, dmd is designed to not require any
 registry entries, environment variable edits, or even having the PATH set.
 Uninstall is as easy as just blowing away the directory it's installed in.


Is that your only reason for the non-distribute license ??
Feb 10 2006
parent "Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
"Knud Sørensen" <12tkvvb02 sneakemail.com> wrote in message 
news:pan.2006.02.10.22.19.44.994508 sneakemail.com...

 Is that your only reason for the non-distribute license ??


No. There are several reasons, one of which is that the back end is 
licensed.
Feb 10 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Derek Parnell" <derek psych.ward> writes:
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 06:43:51 +1100, Walter Bright  
<newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:


 I personally don't like installers - not because they do a bad job, but
 because
 I never know *what* they're doing to my system.


Agreed, that is your personal opinion. Other people have different and  
just as valid opinions.


 Are they mucking with the
 registry? Installing spyware? Replacing uptodate drivers with older,  
 buggy
 versions? Phoning home?


Not all installers are equal. Some at least do let you know precicely  
what's about to happen etc...


 With zip files, I can see what's going to happen, and my unzipper isn't
 going to execute any code from the archive.


Yes you can, even if its not what you want to happen. For example, replace  
sc.ini even when its been updated locally. The read-only hack is a big  
hassle because some files you do want to replace and others you don't!


 In keeping with avoiding an installer, dmd is designed to not require any
 registry entries, environment variable edits, or even having the PATH  
 set.
 Uninstall is as easy as just blowing away the directory it's installed  
 in.


Some people see a standard installer as a sign of maturity for a product.

I'll knock up an install package and send it to you for inspection.

-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
Feb 10 2006
parent Kyle Furlong <kylefurlong gmail.com> writes:
Derek Parnell wrote:

 On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 06:43:51 +1100, Walter Bright 
 <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:
 

 I personally don't like installers - not because they do a bad job, but
 because
 I never know *what* they're doing to my system.


 
 Agreed, that is your personal opinion. Other people have different and 
 just as valid opinions.
 

 Are they mucking with the
 registry? Installing spyware? Replacing uptodate drivers with older, 
 buggy
 versions? Phoning home?


 
 Not all installers are equal. Some at least do let you know precicely 
 what's about to happen etc...
 

 With zip files, I can see what's going to happen, and my unzipper isn't
 going to execute any code from the archive.


 
 Yes you can, even if its not what you want to happen. For example, 
 replace sc.ini even when its been updated locally. The read-only hack is 
 a big hassle because some files you do want to replace and others you 
 don't!
 

 In keeping with avoiding an installer, dmd is designed to not require any
 registry entries, environment variable edits, or even having the PATH 
 set.
 Uninstall is as easy as just blowing away the directory it's installed 
 in.


 
 Some people see a standard installer as a sign of maturity for a product.
 
 I'll knock up an install package and send it to you for inspection.
 
 --Derek Parnell
 Melbourne, Australia


I agree that an installer is a sign of... maybe not maturity, but definitely of
solid support and polished presence.
Feb 10 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:


 I personally don't like installers - not because they do a bad job, but 
 because
 I never know *what* they're doing to my system. Are they mucking with the
 registry? Installing spyware? Replacing uptodate drivers with older, buggy
 versions? Phoning home?

 With zip files, I can see what's going to happen, and my unzipper isn't
 going to execute any code from the archive.


I provide both installers/archives, plain old ZIPs for the paranoid ;-)

http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=135857&package_id=149174


 In keeping with avoiding an installer, dmd is designed to not require any
 registry entries, environment variable edits, or even having the PATH set.
 Uninstall is as easy as just blowing away the directory it's installed in.


Well, if you ever change your mind - here are the scripts to make EXE:
(readable as-is, but for use with NSIS : http://nsis.sourceforge.net/)

http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd.nsi
http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmc.nsi
http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/AddToPath.nsh [took this one from the wiki]

I unpacked the ZIP files to C:\Temp\DigitalMars and then compiled them:

ftp://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.zip
ftp://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmc.zip
ftp://ftp.digitalmars.com/bup.zip
ftp://ftp.digitalmars.com/coffimplib.zip [added this for good measure]

The end result looked like this:

http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd-setup.html
http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmc-setup.html

Added code to set PATH and keep old "sc.ini"
(it's all in the package specification above)

I will use RPMs and EXEs for GDC, but you can do as you want with DMD.
Just let us now if you need some help with setting the automation up ?

--anders

PS.
The RPM spec to "rpmbuild -bb" RPMS is at:
http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd.spec

Being updated to fix some quirks on FC4,
since recls/stlsoft doesn't support GCC4...
Feb 10 2006
next sibling parent reply "Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
"Anders F Björklund" <afb algonet.se> wrote in message 
news:dsj8rl$2lfa$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Being updated to fix some quirks on FC4,
 since recls/stlsoft doesn't support GCC4...


There are some new functions in std.file that might serve.
Feb 10 2006
parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:


Being updated to fix some quirks on FC4,
since recls/stlsoft doesn't support GCC4...


 
 There are some new functions in std.file that might serve. 


Just a silly little header problem, nothing major...

See http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd-0.140-gcc4.patch

--anders
Feb 11 2006
parent reply "Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
"Anders F Björklund" <afb algonet.se> wrote in message 
news:dsk7eq$p5l$2 digitaldaemon.com...

 Just a silly little header problem, nothing major...

 See http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd-0.140-gcc4.patch


Thanks.
Feb 11 2006
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:


Just a silly little header problem, nothing major...
See http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd-0.140-gcc4.patch


 
 Thanks. 


No problem, the rest of the GDC diff is here if you want it:

http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/diffs/dmd-0.140-gdc-0.17.diff.gz


The more of the GDC patches that can go "upstream" into DMD,
the better. (i.e. with the proper #if's and such, that is...)

Biggest diffs right now is stderr fix, and merging HTML entities.
And of course adding version(Unix) to DMD, in addition to linux ?

--anders
Feb 11 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
"Anders F Björklund" <afb algonet.se> wrote in message 
news:dsj8rl$2lfa$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Well, if you ever change your mind - here are the scripts to make EXE:
 (readable as-is, but for use with NSIS : http://nsis.sourceforge.net/)


Thanks!
Feb 10 2006
parent reply "Derek Parnell" <derek psych.ward> writes:
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 11:22:38 +1100, Walter Bright  
<newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:


 "Anders F Björklund" <afb algonet.se> wrote in message
 news:dsj8rl$2lfa$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Well, if you ever change your mind - here are the scripts to make EXE:
 (readable as-is, but for use with NSIS : http://nsis.sourceforge.net/)


 Thanks!


Ok, it looks like AB beat me to it. I was going to go via NSIS too.

-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
Feb 10 2006
parent =?UTF-8?B?QW5kZXJzIEYgQmrDtnJrbHVuZA==?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Derek Parnell wrote:


 Ok, it looks like AB beat me to it. I was going to go via NSIS too.


Feel free to look the script over to see if I missed anything...

Some "D man" artwork for the installer could be useful, as well ?
(eg http://sourceforge.net/project/screenshots.php?group_id=135857)

--anders
Feb 11 2006
prev sibling parent reply Dave <Dave_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <dsj8rl$2lfa$1 digitaldaemon.com>,
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= says...

I will use RPMs and EXEs for GDC, but you can do as you want with DMD.
Just let us now if you need some help with setting the automation up ?


Wondering if David Friedman would host a link to these on his site, or if it's
ever been discussed?

One stop shopping and all that...

Thanks,

- Dave


--anders

PS.
The RPM spec to "rpmbuild -bb" RPMS is at:
http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd.spec

Being updated to fix some quirks on FC4,
since recls/stlsoft doesn't support GCC4...
Feb 10 2006
parent reply "Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
"Dave" <Dave_member pathlink.com> wrote in message 
news:dsjhau$2rdi$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Wondering if David Friedman would host a link to these on his site, or if 
 it's
 ever been discussed?

 One stop shopping and all that...


Ask him!
Feb 10 2006
parent reply Dave <Dave_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <dsjq1j$5rv$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...

"Dave" <Dave_member pathlink.com> wrote in message 
news:dsjhau$2rdi$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Wondering if David Friedman would host a link to these on his site, or if 
 it's
 ever been discussed?

 One stop shopping and all that...


Ask him! 


I don't know if Linux links are available yet and/or didn't see them posted here
(the ? was directed at Anders - for all I know they've already discussed it).

Anders? David?
Feb 10 2006
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Dave wrote:


Wondering if David Friedman would host a link to these on his site, or if 
it's ever been discussed?

One stop shopping and all that...


Ask him! 


 
 I don't know if Linux links are available yet and/or didn't see them posted
here
 (the ? was directed at Anders - for all I know they've already discussed it).
 
 Anders? David?


Waiting for David to set up the new SourceForge site,
so that I wouldn't have to move all the binaries later.

Building for MinGW is quite new to me, but the RPMS
have been building against the system for some time.


We could still use a highpower D community site, as
has been mentioned recently - with both binaries and
documentation and so on. Like a central place for GDC ?

I'm away next week, but have posted all the sources.

--anders
Feb 11 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Hasan Aljudy <hasan.aljudy gmail.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message
 news:dshpvp$m1g$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 


<snip>

 
 In keeping with avoiding an installer, dmd is designed to not require any
 registry entries, environment variable edits, or even having the PATH set.
 Uninstall is as easy as just blowing away the directory it's installed in.
 


How come that's not the case with Linux? Why can't I just unzip dmd 
somewhere and make it work? (or maybe I can but I'm too stupid to figure 
it out?)
Feb 12 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Roberto Mariottini <Roberto_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <dsir7e$1meh$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...

I personally don't like installers - not because they do a bad job, but 
because
I never know *what* they're doing to my system. Are they mucking with the
registry? Installing spyware? Replacing uptodate drivers with older, buggy
versions? Phoning home?


I don't know its name. but the installer used by BZFlag (www.bzflag.org) says
everything it does, with a nice scrollbar to see every move of it.

Ciao

---
http://www.mariottini.net/roberto/
Feb 13 2006
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Julio_C=E9sar_Carrascal_Urquijo?= writes:
Roberto Mariottini wrote:

 I don't know its name. but the installer used by BZFlag (www.bzflag.org) says
 everything it does, with a nice scrollbar to see every move of it.


They use NSIS: http://nsis.sourceforge.net/
Feb 15 2006
prev sibling parent Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
 news:dshpvp$m1g$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 

 Anders F Björklund wrote: <snip>
 

 Walter does not want to do it for DMD (for Windows and Linux), 
 and due to the non-distribute license nobody else can either.


 
 <snip>
 
 Does DMD really need an installer?  Opening a .zip file and
 extracting its contents isn't that difficult an operation.


 
 
 I personally don't like installers - not because they do a bad job,
 but because I never know *what* they're doing to my system. Are they
 mucking with the registry? Installing spyware? Replacing uptodate
 drivers with older, buggy versions? Phoning home?


Whoah! Installing a 'nice FREE screensaver with live paradise scenery' 
is a bit different than installing Mozilla or Firefox.


 With zip files, I can see what's going to happen, and my unzipper
 isn't going to execute any code from the archive.


We're talking Windoze here! Users simply consider a zip thingy 
home-made, no matter how good the program itself would be. And they hate 
having to do _anything_ themselves.


 In keeping with avoiding an installer, dmd is designed to not require
 any registry entries, environment variable edits, or even having the
 PATH set. Uninstall is as easy as just blowing away the directory
 it's installed in.


Just _having_ an installer doesn't create registry tweaks, environment 
mucking, or path changes. It's just another brick in the wall of deceit 
and make-believe that is _required_ between the user and what's 
happening for real. And if there's nothing happening, the easier for 
you. But it sure has to _look_ like a Grand Opening.
Feb 20 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
nick wrote:


 I think that before a 1.0 is released, the D online presence needs to be 
 cleaned up a bit. Ideally, there would be one site that people could go 
 to and easily get started with D. That means the site would have to be 
 entirely dedicated to D, easy to follow, pleasant to look at, with no 
 duplicated or rendunant/inconsistent information, etc. [...]


If someone could put http://opend.org and http://sf.net/projects/brightd
out of their misery, that'd be good thing for D-outside-of-DigitalMars.

They haven't been updated since 2002, and just give a bad impression...

--anders
Feb 09 2006
next sibling parent Marco <Marco_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <dsf0cq$t8j$2 digitaldaemon.com>,
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= says...

If someone could put http://opend.org and http://sf.net/projects/brightd
out of their misery, that'd be good thing for D-outside-of-DigitalMars.

They haven't been updated since 2002, and just give a bad impression...


SourceForge should give a time limit for projects to release some code or else
get deleted. I have no problem with projects that stop but have code, at least
someone else may be able to use something from it.
Feb 10 2006
prev sibling parent jcc7 <jcc7_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <dsf0cq$t8j$2 digitaldaemon.com>,
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= says...

nick wrote:


 I think that before a 1.0 is released, the D online presence needs to be 
 cleaned up a bit. Ideally, there would be one site that people could go 
 to and easily get started with D. That means the site would have to be 
 entirely dedicated to D, easy to follow, pleasant to look at, with no 
 duplicated or rendunant/inconsistent information, etc. [...]


If someone could put http://opend.org and http://sf.net/projects/brightd
out of their misery, that'd be good thing for D-outside-of-DigitalMars.

They haven't been updated since 2002, and just give a bad impression...


Those aren't the only outdated pages that refer to D out there, but they're the
most embarrassing. I have a suspicion that a friend of D (or even Walter) has
been paying for the domain name and hosting of opend.org for the last few years,
but without any updating its existence doesn't help D's reputation.

jcc7
Feb 10 2006
prev sibling parent Nick <Nick_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <dsepem$hcm$1 digitaldaemon.com>, nick says...

I think that before a 1.0 is released, the D online presence needs to be 
cleaned up a bit. Ideally, there would be one site that people could go 
to and easily get started with D. That means the site would have to be 
entirely dedicated to D, easy to follow, pleasant to look at, with no 
duplicated or rendunant/inconsistent information, etc. A second site 
would be dedicated to projects (dsource.org already exists but needs to 
be cleaned up).


I agree, I can envision a site with introductions, tutorials, specifications,
references, downloads, forums, links, a "news" column, etc. I see that
dlanguage.com and .org are available...

Nick
Feb 09 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
cletuspaul wrote:

 D seems sufficiently mature that a Release 1.0 should be finalized now, rather
 than waiting to iron out all of the little kinks.
 
 Many other languages started life as rough and messy hatchlings, only to mature
 later.  Pascal did not get wings until Borlad invested time and resources on
it.
 So it is time for a Release 1.0 -- later on we can remove the warts and
pimples.


But did the creators of those languages realise that they were rough and 
messy hatchlings when their 1.0s were released?

At the moment there are just too many showstoppers.  Among them, there 
are enough holes and inconsistencies in the spec that it's impossible to 
write a complete and correct D compiler.  See

http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?PendingPeeves

Prospective compiler writers will think "it's reached 1.0, so it must be 
implementable", only to find out the hard way that they're wrong.

Designing D has involved learning from the mistakes of other languages. 
  This should extend to the decision of when is 1.0 time.

Stewart.

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M d- s:- C++  a->--- UB  P+ L E  W++  N+++ o K-  w++  O? M V? PS- 
PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Feb 09 2006
prev sibling parent clayasaurus <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:
cletuspaul wrote:

 D seems sufficiently mature that a Release 1.0 should be finalized now, rather
 than waiting to iron out all of the little kinks.
 
 Many other languages started life as rough and messy hatchlings, only to mature
 later.  Pascal did not get wings until Borlad invested time and resources on
it.
 So it is time for a Release 1.0 -- later on we can remove the warts and
pimples.
 


I'd give D another year before it should really start thinking about 
1.0. Stall the beta process longer to get the compiler stable and get 
all the easy features in, also give a chance for the libraries to become 
a little more useful (DWT, etc.) before going 1.0.
Feb 10 2006