digitalmars.D - Exceptional News
- David Nadlinger (16/16) Feb 11 2013 Looks like we are finally getting somewhere. :)
- Iain Buclaw (5/21) Feb 11 2013 Rather amusing. :-)
- Andrei Alexandrescu (3/18) Feb 11 2013 Awesome!!!
- Iain Buclaw (7/28) Feb 11 2013 This feature has been around for some time (somewhere in lexer.c iirc) -
- Jesse Phillips (4/7) Feb 14 2013 LLVM hasn't had support for Exceptions in Windows, Hence the
- =?UTF-8?B?U8O2bmtlIEx1ZHdpZw==?= (3/20) Feb 11 2013 Great news!
- Dmitry Olshansky (5/20) Feb 11 2013 Nice one!
- David Nadlinger (5/7) Feb 14 2013 It would be 4; MinGW for Win64 uses SEH, and LLVM still doesn't
- Nick Sabalausky (8/26) Feb 11 2013 I took my mind a minute to process the point of that ("Is
- David Nadlinger (12/15) Feb 14 2013 Don't get too excited. ;) There is still a lot to do, several
- bearophile (5/9) Feb 14 2013 Why don't you create one zip or rar, that a user unpacks, adds a
- David Nadlinger (6/13) Feb 14 2013 Because it's not ready for general consumption yet. For binary
- bearophile (6/7) Feb 14 2013 If trying the compiler is so complex/hard/time consuming as it
- David Nadlinger (6/11) Feb 14 2013 If you don't want to contribute to LDC development, you shouldn't
- Andrej Mitrovic (7/11) Feb 14 2013 I suppose I'll give this a try tonight. However these steps should
- jerro (5/7) Feb 14 2013 It seems there is a bug in the MinGW TLS support patch linked
- David Nadlinger (4/11) Feb 14 2013 Yes, always those last-minute refactorings…
Looks like we are finally getting somewhere. :) --- version (Windows) {} else static assert(false); void main() { try { throw new Exception("This exception..."); } catch (Exception e) { import std.stdio; writeln(e.msg, " ... has been caught for you by ", __VENDOR__, "."); } } --- This exception... ... has been caught for you by LDC. --- David
Feb 11 2013
On 11 February 2013 13:00, David Nadlinger <see klickverbot.at> wrote:Looks like we are finally getting somewhere. :) --- version (Windows) {} else static assert(false); void main() { try { throw new Exception("This exception..."); } catch (Exception e) { import std.stdio; writeln(e.msg, " ... has been caught for you by ", __VENDOR__, "."); } } --- This exception... ... has been caught for you by LDC. --- DavidRather amusing. :-) -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Feb 11 2013
On 2/11/13 8:00 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:Looks like we are finally getting somewhere. :) --- version (Windows) {} else static assert(false); void main() { try { throw new Exception("This exception..."); } catch (Exception e) { import std.stdio; writeln(e.msg, " ... has been caught for you by ", __VENDOR__, "."); } } --- This exception... ... has been caught for you by LDC. --- DavidAwesome!!! Andrei
Feb 11 2013
On 11 February 2013 13:29, Andrei Alexandrescu < SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:On 2/11/13 8:00 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:This feature has been around for some time (somewhere in lexer.c iirc) - have you really only just added LDC into it David? -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';Looks like we are finally getting somewhere. :) --- version (Windows) {} else static assert(false); void main() { try { throw new Exception("This exception..."); } catch (Exception e) { import std.stdio; writeln(e.msg, " ... has been caught for you by ", __VENDOR__, "."); } } --- This exception... ... has been caught for you by LDC. --- DavidAwesome!!! Andrei
Feb 11 2013
On Monday, 11 February 2013 at 13:33:28 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:This feature has been around for some time (somewhere in lexer.c iirc) - have you really only just added LDC into it David?LLVM hasn't had support for Exceptions in Windows, Hence the begining version (Windows) {} else static assert(false);
Feb 14 2013
Am 11.02.2013 14:00, schrieb David Nadlinger:Looks like we are finally getting somewhere. :) --- version (Windows) {} else static assert(false); void main() { try { throw new Exception("This exception..."); } catch (Exception e) { import std.stdio; writeln(e.msg, " ... has been caught for you by ", __VENDOR__, "."); } } --- This exception... ... has been caught for you by LDC. --- DavidGreat news! How is it implemented? SEH? Did LLVM get any recent additions in this area?
Feb 11 2013
11-Feb-2013 17:00, David Nadlinger пишет:Looks like we are finally getting somewhere. :) --- version (Windows) {} else static assert(false); void main() { try { throw new Exception("This exception..."); } catch (Exception e) { import std.stdio; writeln(e.msg, " ... has been caught for you by ", __VENDOR__, "."); } } --- This exception... ... has been caught for you by LDC. ---Nice one! There got to be size_t.sizeof printed somewhere ... :) -- Dmitry Olshansky
Feb 11 2013
On Monday, 11 February 2013 at 17:19:16 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:Nice one! There got to be size_t.sizeof printed somewhere ... :)It would be 4; MinGW for Win64 uses SEH, and LLVM still doesn't support that (although there is hope). David
Feb 14 2013
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:00:17 +0100 "David Nadlinger" <see klickverbot.at> wrote:Looks like we are finally getting somewhere. :) --- version (Windows) {} else static assert(false); void main() { try { throw new Exception("This exception..."); } catch (Exception e) { import std.stdio; writeln(e.msg, " ... has been caught for you by ", __VENDOR__, "."); } } --- This exception... ... has been caught for you by LDC. --- DavidI took my mind a minute to process the point of that ("Is __VENDOR__ a new thing? Is it something about nested exceptions? What's with the version(Windows)...?") ...and then my thoughts jumped straight to: Holy shit!! :) Fantastic news!
Feb 11 2013
On Monday, 11 February 2013 at 21:50:35 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:...and then my thoughts jumped straight to: Holy shit!! :) Fantastic news!Don't get too excited. ;) There is still a lot to do, several test cases/unit tests still fail (mainly FP precision and ABI related). But, yes, now there is a real chance of Windows being a "first-class target" for LDC in the near future. I would very much appreciate any help on crushing the remaining bugs (it's not rocket science), see http://wiki.dlang.org/Building_LDC_on_MinGW_x86 for build instructions. David
Feb 14 2013
David Nadlinger:I would very much appreciate any help on crushing the remaining bugs (it's not rocket science), see http://wiki.dlang.org/Building_LDC_on_MinGW_x86 for build instructions.Why don't you create one zip or rar, that a user unpacks, adds a path, and tries the compiler? Bye, bearophile
Feb 14 2013
On Thursday, 14 February 2013 at 23:19:38 UTC, bearophile wrote:David Nadlinger:Because it's not ready for general consumption yet. For binary packages for the other platforms, see the last release announcement: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/yxklohfbaltbcdnkpnqw forum.dlang.org. DavidI would very much appreciate any help on crushing the remaining bugs (it's not rocket science), see http://wiki.dlang.org/Building_LDC_on_MinGW_x86 for build instructions.Why don't you create one zip or rar, that a user unpacks, adds a path, and tries the compiler?
Feb 14 2013
David Nadlinger:Because it's not ready for general consumption yet.If trying the compiler is so complex/hard/time consuming as it looks, I will probably not try it. And maybe other people will do the same. So it will take even more time to find its bugs. Bye, bearophile
Feb 14 2013
On Friday, 15 February 2013 at 00:02:00 UTC, bearophile wrote:David Nadlinger:If you don't want to contribute to LDC development, you shouldn't try it on MinGW yet. Simple as that. When the test suite has turned green or near-green, we will of course release binary packages. DavidBecause it's not ready for general consumption yet.If trying the compiler is so complex/hard/time consuming as it looks, I will probably not try it. And maybe other people will do the same. So it will take even more time to find its bugs.
Feb 14 2013
On 2/14/13, David Nadlinger <see klickverbot.at> wrote:I would very much appreciate any help on crushing the remaining bugs (it's not rocket science), see http://wiki.dlang.org/Building_LDC_on_MinGW_x86 for build instructions.I suppose I'll give this a try tonight. However these steps should really be part of a nice and simple D script that does this automatically. Only then can we be sure the instructions are up to date, + it will save time for potential contributors. If I get a working build done I'll try writing such a script. I'm eager to escape the wrath of Optlink on win32. :p
Feb 14 2013
http://wiki.dlang.org/Building_LDC_on_MinGW_x86 for build instructions.It seems there is a bug in the MinGW TLS support patch linked from that page. This line: + DAG.getExternalSymbol("_tls_array"), getPointerTy()); should be + DAG.getExternalSymbol("_tls_array", getPointerTy()));
Feb 14 2013
On Friday, 15 February 2013 at 02:41:47 UTC, jerro wrote:Yes, always those last-minute refactorings… I fixed the Gist an hour or so ago. Davidhttp://wiki.dlang.org/Building_LDC_on_MinGW_x86 for build instructions.It seems there is a bug in the MinGW TLS support patch linked from that page. This line: + DAG.getExternalSymbol("_tls_array"), getPointerTy()); should be + DAG.getExternalSymbol("_tls_array", getPointerTy()));
Feb 14 2013