www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Move VisualD to github/d-programming-language ?

reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical piece 
of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft Visual Studio.)

Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on this.

What do you think?
Sep 07 2013
next sibling parent "andrea9940" <no mail.plz> writes:
Simply awsome
Sep 07 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 12:04:51PM -0700, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)
 
 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.
 
 What do you think?


Well, since github already has a VisualD repo under dlang.org, I guess
it's already decided? :)

I agree, though, that this inclusion is important to eliminate the
perception that VisualD is second-class, and to encourage better IDE
integration for D (even though I don't use IDEs myself).


T

-- 
The problem with the world is that everybody else is stupid.
Sep 07 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a 
 critical piece of D infrastructure.


Then it should be here: http://dlang.org/download.html

That's the most important change that needs to be made.
Sep 07 2013
parent reply "SomeDude" <lovelydear mailmetrash.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:26:11 UTC, Peter Alexander 
wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is 
 a critical piece of D infrastructure.


 Then it should be here: http://dlang.org/download.html

 That's the most important change that needs to be made.


+1
Sep 21 2013
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/21/13 3:04 AM, SomeDude wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:26:11 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure.


 Then it should be here: http://dlang.org/download.html

 That's the most important change that needs to be made.


 +1


Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull request. Rainer?

Andrei
Sep 21 2013
next sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
On 21 September 2013 21:06, Andrei Alexandrescu <
SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:


 On 9/21/13 3:04 AM, SomeDude wrote:


 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:26:11 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:


 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:


 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure.


 Then it should be here: http://dlang.org/download.html

 That's the most important change that needs to be made.


 +1


 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull request. Rainer?



I think it's equally important to move DMD1 and DMC down the bottom into
small text links.
Last time I went looking for GDC I didn't see the link there because it was
off the screen, and I skipped past presuming that page was just for
walter's binaries since they dominated my screen.
Sep 21 2013
parent "eles" <eles eles.com> writes:
On Saturday, 21 September 2013 at 16:37:08 UTC, Manu wrote:

 On 21 September 2013 21:06, Andrei Alexandrescu <
 SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:


 On 9/21/13 3:04 AM, SomeDude wrote:


 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:26:11 UTC, Peter 
 Alexander wrote:


 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:


 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD 
 is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure.


 Then it should be here: http://dlang.org/download.html

 That's the most important change that needs to be made.


 +1


 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull request. 
 Rainer?



 I think it's equally important to move DMD1 and DMC down the 
 bottom into
 small text links.


Or link towards a D1 download page and DMC's download page.
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling parent reply Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de> writes:
On 21.09.2013 13:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/21/13 3:04 AM, SomeDude wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:26:11 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure.


 Then it should be here: http://dlang.org/download.html

 That's the most important change that needs to be made.


 +1


 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull request. Rainer?

 Andrei


I have created pull requests

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/384 and 
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/385

the result can be seen here: http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?

Links are still to other sites, how do we get the installer and the 
Visual D pages uploaded to dlang.org?
Sep 22 2013
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 21.09.2013 13:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/21/13 3:04 AM, SomeDude wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:26:11 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure.


 Then it should be here: http://dlang.org/download.html

 That's the most important change that needs to be made.


 +1


 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull request. Rainer?

 Andrei


 I have created pull requests

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/384 and
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/385

 the result can be seen here: http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


I think so.


 Links are still to other sites, how do we get the installer and the
 Visual D pages uploaded to dlang.org?


Walter, Brad, or I need to do the upload for now (we're working on 
improving the process). What you'd need to do is just create pull 
requests for the site and the installer. Once pulled, we'll build and 
upload.


Andrei
Sep 24 2013
parent reply Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de> writes:
On 24.09.2013 19:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 21.09.2013 13:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull request. Rainer?

 Andrei


 I have created pull requests

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/384 and
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/385

 the result can be seen here:
 http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What are the 
appropriate links? Are there any direct download links?


 Links are still to other sites, how do we get the installer and the
 Visual D pages uploaded to dlang.org?





 Walter, Brad, or I need to do the upload for now (we're working on
 improving the process). What you'd need to do is just create pull
 requests for the site and the installer. Once pulled, we'll build and
 upload.


Do you mean that I should add the documentation to the dlang.org 
repository? It's currently part of the visuald repository, and it could 
also be referred to by the makefile in dlang.org, but that might mean 
that people building that will also have to clone the visuald repository.

Regarding the installer: Visual D should be built with a precise GC, but 
that's currently only possible with a patched compiler and runtime. I'll 
have to provide the binaries somehow, but I think git isn't appropriate 
to do so.
Sep 24 2013
next sibling parent "Kapps" <opantm2+spam gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 18:19:26 UTC, Rainer Schuetze 
wrote:

 Regarding the installer: Visual D should be built with a 
 precise GC, but that's currently only possible with a patched 
 compiler and runtime. I'll have to provide the binaries 
 somehow, but I think git isn't appropriate to do so.


Perhaps this is something that Github Releases could be used for?

https://github.com/blog/1547-release-your-software
Sep 24 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/24/13 11:19 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 24.09.2013 19:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


 Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What are the
 appropriate links? Are there any direct download links?


Thanks very much for leading this.


 Links are still to other sites, how do we get the installer and the
 Visual D pages uploaded to dlang.org?





 Walter, Brad, or I need to do the upload for now (we're working on
 improving the process). What you'd need to do is just create pull
 requests for the site and the installer. Once pulled, we'll build and
 upload.


 Do you mean that I should add the documentation to the dlang.org
 repository? It's currently part of the visuald repository, and it could
 also be referred to by the makefile in dlang.org, but that might mean
 that people building that will also have to clone the visuald repository.


I preapprove any pages that refer exclusively to Visual D in the 
dlang.org repo. I trust you to design and write them within the site 
look and feel, and to organize them in directories appropriately.

Alternatively, if you prefer to distinguish Visual D's identity, feel 
free to keep your own site and pages for it. I'd personally prefer 
integration - we're small enough to thrive on integration.


 Regarding the installer: Visual D should be built with a precise GC, but
 that's currently only possible with a patched compiler and runtime. I'll
 have to provide the binaries somehow, but I think git isn't appropriate
 to do so.


Hmmm, where's that effort right now? The fact that we have a serious 
application needing precise GC is a good argument to make it the 
default, or at least an easy to choose option.


Andrei
Sep 24 2013
next sibling parent reply Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de> writes:
On 24.09.2013 21:31, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/24/13 11:19 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 24.09.2013 19:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


 Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What are the
 appropriate links? Are there any direct download links?


 Thanks very much for leading this.


 Links are still to other sites, how do we get the installer and the
 Visual D pages uploaded to dlang.org?





 Walter, Brad, or I need to do the upload for now (we're working on
 improving the process). What you'd need to do is just create pull
 requests for the site and the installer. Once pulled, we'll build and
 upload.


 Do you mean that I should add the documentation to the dlang.org
 repository? It's currently part of the visuald repository, and it could
 also be referred to by the makefile in dlang.org, but that might mean
 that people building that will also have to clone the visuald repository.


 I preapprove any pages that refer exclusively to Visual D in the
 dlang.org repo. I trust you to design and write them within the site
 look and feel, and to organize them in directories appropriately.

 Alternatively, if you prefer to distinguish Visual D's identity, feel
 free to keep your own site and pages for it. I'd personally prefer
 integration - we're small enough to thrive on integration.


The documentation has already been converted to ddoc and can be seen 
here: http://rainers.github.io/visuald/visuald/StartPage.html

I'll see how these can be intgrated with the dlang.org makefiles.


 Regarding the installer: Visual D should be built with a precise GC, but
 that's currently only possible with a patched compiler and runtime. I'll
 have to provide the binaries somehow, but I think git isn't appropriate
 to do so.


 Hmmm, where's that effort right now? The fact that we have a serious
 application needing precise GC is a good argument to make it the
 default, or at least an easy to choose option.


One big issue with it is correct RTInfo generation. I've made an attempt 
to fix the compiler ( 
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/2480 ), but that 
didn't get any reviews so far.

Druntime patches are here: 
https://github.com/rainers/druntime/tree/gcx_precise but they break the 
test suite without the patch above.

In addition something has to be done about specifying type info for the 
data segment. I have some compiler/druntime patches for that, but they 
are specific to the OMF file format so far. Some general solution would 
be better.
Sep 24 2013
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/24/13 2:13 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 One big issue with it is correct RTInfo generation. I've made an attempt
 to fix the compiler (
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/2480 ), but that
 didn't get any reviews so far.

 Druntime patches are here:
 https://github.com/rainers/druntime/tree/gcx_precise but they break the
 test suite without the patch above.

 In addition something has to be done about specifying type info for the
 data segment. I have some compiler/druntime patches for that, but they
 are specific to the OMF file format so far. Some general solution would
 be better.


Core/druntime teams: could you please put this on the front burner? Thanks!

Andrei
Sep 24 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-24 23:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 Core/druntime teams: could you please put this on the front burner? Thanks!


Might be a bit hard to find your post here deep inside this thread.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Sep 25 2013
prev sibling parent Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de> writes:
On 24.09.2013 21:31, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/24/13 11:19 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 24.09.2013 19:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:


 Do you mean that I should add the documentation to the dlang.org
 repository? It's currently part of the visuald repository, and it could
 also be referred to by the makefile in dlang.org, but that might mean
 that people building that will also have to clone the visuald repository.


 I preapprove any pages that refer exclusively to Visual D in the
 dlang.org repo. I trust you to design and write them within the site
 look and feel, and to organize them in directories appropriately.


Sorry for the silence, I've been traveling for the last week. Here's a 
pull request for dlang.org;

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/389
Oct 03 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "simendsjo" <simendsjo gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 18:19:26 UTC, Rainer Schuetze 
wrote:

 On 24.09.2013 19:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 21.09.2013 13:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull 
 request. Rainer?

 Andrei


 I have created pull requests

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/384 
 and
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/385

 the result can be seen here:
 http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


 Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What are 
 the appropriate links? Are there any direct download links?


One little problem. MonoDevelop isn't always up to date on 
various repos. Because of this, Alexander builds his own version. 
This precompiled package is hosted at my server. While I don't 
reboot it very often, it is perhaps not the best place to store 
this if it's "part" of D by being placed on the homepage. I would 
recommend hosting the MonoDevelop build as well so no user comes 
complaining if my server is down.
Sep 24 2013
next sibling parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 20:32:51 UTC, simendsjo wrote:

 On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 18:19:26 UTC, Rainer Schuetze 
 wrote:

 On 24.09.2013 19:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 21.09.2013 13:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull 
 request. Rainer?

 Andrei


 I have created pull requests

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/384 
 and
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/385

 the result can be seen here:
 http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


 Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What are 
 the appropriate links? Are there any direct download links?


 One little problem. MonoDevelop isn't always up to date on 
 various repos. Because of this, Alexander builds his own 
 version. This precompiled package is hosted at my server. While 
 I don't reboot it very often, it is perhaps not the best place 
 to store this if it's "part" of D by being placed on the 
 homepage. I would recommend hosting the MonoDevelop build as 
 well so no user comes complaining if my server is down.


I actually think Mono-D must chose one long term support 
MonoDevelop version before being officially endorsed. Currently I 
am not aware of a single distro where it will work out of the box 
with stock MonoDevelop and forcing people to use that blob or 
compile from sources does not really smell good. I know this is 
much stress on Alex but simply don't see other way around.
Sep 24 2013
parent reply "simendsjo" <simendsjo gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 22:53:39 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 20:32:51 UTC, simendsjo wrote:

 On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 18:19:26 UTC, Rainer Schuetze 
 wrote:

 On 24.09.2013 19:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 21.09.2013 13:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull 
 request. Rainer?

 Andrei


 I have created pull requests

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/384 
 and
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/385

 the result can be seen here:
 http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


 Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What 
 are the appropriate links? Are there any direct download 
 links?


 One little problem. MonoDevelop isn't always up to date on 
 various repos. Because of this, Alexander builds his own 
 version. This precompiled package is hosted at my server. 
 While I don't reboot it very often, it is perhaps not the best 
 place to store this if it's "part" of D by being placed on the 
 homepage. I would recommend hosting the MonoDevelop build as 
 well so no user comes complaining if my server is down.


 I actually think Mono-D must chose one long term support 
 MonoDevelop version before being officially endorsed. Currently 
 I am not aware of a single distro where it will work out of the 
 box with stock MonoDevelop and forcing people to use that blob 
 or compile from sources does not really smell good. I know this 
 is much stress on Alex but simply don't see other way around.


The problem as I understand it is that distros pack different 
versions of MD, and MD keeps changing it's API for every release. 
In other words - there is no long-term support. Mono-D needs to 
either support the latest and greatest and prepare a MD release 
each time the API changes, or try to support as many API versions 
as possible. I think the latter is problematic.
Sep 25 2013
parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Wednesday, 25 September 2013 at 11:42:41 UTC, simendsjo wrote:

 The problem as I understand it is that distros pack different 
 versions of MD, and MD keeps changing it's API for every 
 release. In other words - there is no long-term support. Mono-D 
 needs to either support the latest and greatest and prepare a 
 MD release each time the API changes, or try to support as many 
 API versions as possible. I think the latter is problematic.


Yeah, I know that, Alex has been speaking about it some time ago. 
But providing older/newer version of MonoDevelop for specific 
distro is not that difficult - only if this version is not going 
to change every month or so though.

Given the way they break API it will make sense to stick to 
current major branch once it gets relatively stable and just 
ignore newer releases. Bleeding edge distros will be dissapointed 
but MonoDevelop guys push it far out of the limits of reasonable 
bleeding edge.

Or probably someone can come up with some different solution. 
What I am convinced about is that _current_ situation is 
unacceptable for officially endorces project.
Sep 25 2013
parent "Wyatt" <wyatt.epp gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 25 September 2013 at 11:54:22 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 Given the way they break API it will make sense to stick to 
 current major branch once it gets relatively stable and just 
 ignore newer releases. Bleeding edge distros will be 
 dissapointed but MonoDevelop guys push it far out of the limits 
 of reasonable bleeding edge.


For what it's worth, even our Gentoo maintainers have apparently 
gotten fed up with their crap.  There are two versions in the 
main Portage tree right now: 2.8.5.1 and 3.0.2-r1. Both are 
marked stable.  Make of that what you will.

-Wyatt
Sep 25 2013
prev sibling parent "Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 20:32:51 UTC, simendsjo wrote:

 On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 18:19:26 UTC, Rainer Schuetze 
 wrote:

 On 24.09.2013 19:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/22/13 7:05 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 On 21.09.2013 13:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Preapproved. Looking forward to the appropriate pull 
 request. Rainer?

 Andrei


 I have created pull requests

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/384 
 and
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/385

 the result can be seen here:
 http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


 Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What are 
 the appropriate links? Are there any direct download links?


 One little problem. MonoDevelop isn't always up to date on 
 various repos. Because of this, Alexander builds his own 
 version. This precompiled package is hosted at my server. While 
 I don't reboot it very often, it is perhaps not the best place 
 to store this if it's "part" of D by being placed on the 
 homepage. I would recommend hosting the MonoDevelop build as 
 well so no user comes complaining if my server is down.


IMHO We need also to convince Alexander to develop against some 
tagged release of MonoDevelop.

If you see my comments to his last rant, you'll see that Mono-D 
is not working even with the latest  'alpha' release of 
MonoDevelop, and if I've understood well (really, I'm not sure to 
have understood Alexander motivations about this) it is arguing 
that he needs the very latest code.

The point is that if a 20 days old release is "too old", I think 
we have a problem here...

- Paolo Invernizzi
Sep 25 2013
prev sibling parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com> writes:
On 24/09/2013 19:19, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 the result can be seen here:
 http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


 Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What are the
 appropriate links? Are there any direct download links?


There are no direct downloads for DDT. The closest starting point is:
http://code.google.com/p/ddt/wiki/Installation

I'm ok with links being added, although I'm not sure what all this would 
help to achieve. It partially duplicates the http://wiki.dlang.org/IDEs 
wiki entry, which is linked in the downloads navigation sidebar. BTW 
that sub-sidebar could use a cleanup as well, the whole thing is a bit 
disjoint.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
Sep 25 2013
parent reply Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de> writes:
On 25.09.2013 19:36, Bruno Medeiros wrote:

 On 24/09/2013 19:19, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 the result can be seen here:
 http://rainers.github.io/visuald/download.html

 Should we add links to Mono-D and DDT aswell?


 I think so.


 Ok, will add these. Bruno and Alex, is it ok for you? What are the
 appropriate links? Are there any direct download links?


 There are no direct downloads for DDT. The closest starting point
 is: http://code.google.com/p/ddt/wiki/Installation


Hmm, it seems both DDT and Mono-D don't fit too well for the download
page where there are actually only file download links. I guess it might 
be better if they are listed with installation procedures on a sub page 
for "Downloads & Tools". (I just notice that this is what the "IDEs" 
link does, though it links to the wiki which give the impression of an 
external site.)


 I'm ok with links being added, although I'm not sure what all this
 would help to achieve. It partially duplicates the
 http://wiki.dlang.org/IDEs wiki entry, which is linked in the
 downloads navigation sidebar.



 BTW that sub-sidebar could use a cleanup as well, the whole thing is a
 bit disjoint.


I'm not sure what you mean exactly, but I notice the navigation looks 
slightly different on almost every page and a lot of the stuff linked to 
is pretty dated.
Sep 26 2013
parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com> writes:
On 26/09/2013 08:45, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 I'm ok with links being added, although I'm not sure what all this
 would help to achieve. It partially duplicates the
 http://wiki.dlang.org/IDEs wiki entry, which is linked in the
 downloads navigation sidebar.


  > BTW that sub-sidebar could use a cleanup as well, the whole thing is a

 bit disjoint.


 I'm not sure what you mean exactly, but I notice the navigation looks
 slightly different on almost every page and a lot of the stuff linked to
 is pretty dated.


I meant the sub-bar that appears under Downloads & Tools, on the 
downloads page. The one with "Linux notes | Windows notes | ... | 
Editors | IDEs".

If it was up to me, I'd cleanup so that that sub-navigation bar would 
point only to subsections of the Downloads main page (using HTML 
anchors), instead of directly linking to other pages. And I would rework 
the sections so that only the most relevant downloads and tools would 
have their own sections (DMD, GDC, LDC, Editors, IDEs, DMD v1). 
Everything else go to a Other Tools sections at the end (or not be there 
at all, directly linked. Do we really need links to Empire on the main 
download page? Or even to DMC or Optlink documentation?)
But I guess such task is another story..

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
Sep 26 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> writes:
07-Sep-2013 23:04, Walter Bright пишет:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical
 piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft
 Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


Yeah, why not.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky
Sep 07 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Zhouxuan" <pycerl qq.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a 
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage 
 into Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in 
 agreement on this.

 What do you think?


+1
Sep 07 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:
On Sat, 2013-09-07 at 12:15 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 I agree, though, that this inclusion is important to eliminate the
 perception that VisualD is second-class, and to encourage better IDE
 integration for D (even though I don't use IDEs myself).


LiteIDE is a good thing for Go. Eclipse CDT and Code::Blocks are good
for C++. Clearly though Emacs is the one true editor. As is VIM.

Having excellent support for editors and IDEs for D programming is the
mark of a strong and confident community. Support diversity, show
confidence. Standard marketing :-)

Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
connection :-)

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
Sep 07 2013
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/7/2013 12:39 PM, Russel Winder wrote:

 Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
 connection :-)


At GoingNative, even clang demo'd a prototype running under VS.
Sep 07 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:39:21 UTC, Russel Winder 
wrote:

 Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
 connection :-)


Why sadly? It's a fantastic product.
Sep 07 2013
next sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 07.09.2013 21:55, schrieb Peter Alexander:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:39:21 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:

 Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
 connection :-)


 Why sadly? It's a fantastic product.


The only thing I don't like is the reliance on Visual Assist and 
ReSharper for refactoring features that other IDEs offer out of the box.

--
Paulo
Sep 07 2013
parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> writes:
On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 20:02:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Am 07.09.2013 21:55, schrieb Peter Alexander:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:39:21 UTC, Russel Winder 
 wrote:

 Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
 connection :-)


 Why sadly? It's a fantastic product.


 The only thing I don't like is the reliance on Visual Assist 
 and ReSharper for refactoring features that other IDEs offer 
 out of the box.

 --
 Paulo


I'm both pro and against it.

Pro because VisualD seems to be (Pardon me, I don't work on 
Windoze and didn't work with it but trust Windoze D users opinion 
on that) an excellent solution and supporting nicely what seems 
to be *the* IDE in Windoze world.

Against because we need a solution for *all* major platforms 
(Lx32, Lx64, *BSD, apple, w32,w64) and I'm worried that this 
resolution here might lead to a "So, we *do* have an IDE. Case 
closed" attitude.

Kudos anyway to Rainer though for his important work.

A+ -R
Sep 07 2013
next sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 07.09.2013 23:57, schrieb Ramon:> On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 
20:02:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Am 07.09.2013 21:55, schrieb Peter Alexander:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:39:21 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:

 Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
 connection :-)


 Why sadly? It's a fantastic product.


 The only thing I don't like is the reliance on Visual Assist and
 ReSharper for refactoring features that other IDEs offer out of the box.

 --
 Paulo


 I'm both pro and against it.

 Pro because VisualD seems to be (Pardon me, I don't work on Windoze and
 didn't work with it but trust Windoze D users opinion on that) an
 excellent solution and supporting nicely what seems to be *the* IDE in
 Windoze world.

 Against because we need a solution for *all* major platforms (Lx32,
 Lx64, *BSD, apple, w32,w64) and I'm worried that this resolution here
 might lead to a "So, we *do* have an IDE. Case closed" attitude.

 Kudos anyway to Rainer though for his important work.

 A+ -R


Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the only 
options are InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well 
received by most C and C++ guys. The target audience for D.

That is my humble opinion, regarding the type of tooling I expect from
an IDE.

--
Paulo
Sep 07 2013
next sibling parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 08/09/13 00:35, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the only options are
 InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well received by most C and C++
 guys. The target audience for D.

 That is my humble opinion, regarding the type of tooling I expect from
 an IDE.


For a cross-platform IDE, I can't say I have that much experience, but I'd be 
inclined to give Qt Creator some serious consideration.  Seemed nice in and of 
itself, it's properly cross-platform -- if I was writing much C/C++ these days 
I'd probably be using it.

I'm not sure how easy it is to write plugins for other languages and compilers, 
but I think it'd be worth looking into.
Sep 07 2013
next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 08.09.2013 00:50, schrieb Joseph Rushton Wakeling:

 On 08/09/13 00:35, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the only
 options are
 InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well received by most
 C and C++
 guys. The target audience for D.

 That is my humble opinion, regarding the type of tooling I expect from
 an IDE.


 For a cross-platform IDE, I can't say I have that much experience, but
 I'd be inclined to give Qt Creator some serious consideration.  Seemed
 nice in and of itself, it's properly cross-platform -- if I was writing
 much C/C++ these days I'd probably be using it.

 I'm not sure how easy it is to write plugins for other languages and
 compilers, but I think it'd be worth looking into.


QtCreator is quite good, actually. I forgot to mention it.

--
Paulo
Sep 07 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Flamaros" <flamaros.xavier gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 22:50:45 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:

 On 08/09/13 00:35, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the 
 only options are
 InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well received 
 by most C and C++
 guys. The target audience for D.

 That is my humble opinion, regarding the type of tooling I 
 expect from
 an IDE.


 For a cross-platform IDE, I can't say I have that much 
 experience, but I'd be inclined to give Qt Creator some serious 
 consideration.  Seemed nice in and of itself, it's properly 
 cross-platform -- if I was writing much C/C++ these days I'd 
 probably be using it.

 I'm not sure how easy it is to write plugins for other 
 languages and compilers, but I think it'd be worth looking into.


I had try, it seems feasible, but it's an huge amount of work.
It's preferable to let contributors choose for which IDE they 
want add D support.
If you want try with QtCreator is a good thing, but it will 
certainly best to concentrate effort on projects that are already 
usable.

I hope to see MonoD on github/d-programming-language too if it's 
the case of VisualD.
Sep 07 2013
next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/7/2013 4:22 PM, Flamaros wrote:

 I hope to see MonoD on github/d-programming-language too if it's the case of
 VisualD.


MonoD is definitely a contender for that. But let's take a moment to digest 
VisualD before we overreach!
Sep 07 2013
parent "Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 23:31:20 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 On 9/7/2013 4:22 PM, Flamaros wrote:

 I hope to see MonoD on github/d-programming-language too if 
 it's the case of
 VisualD.


 MonoD is definitely a contender for that. But let's take a 
 moment to digest VisualD before we overreach!


Mono-D is an amazing piece of software, with a first-class parser 
and suggestion engine.
But the most valuable part of the project is Alexander Bothe, a 
tireless enhancer of the product and a person very responsive to 
user problems that may arise now and then...

Strongly advised

- Paolo Invernizzi
Sep 08 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 08/09/13 01:22, Flamaros wrote:

 I had try, it seems feasible, but it's an huge amount of work.
 It's preferable to let contributors choose for which IDE they want add D
support.
 If you want try with QtCreator is a good thing, but it will certainly best to
 concentrate effort on projects that are already usable.


That's fair enough, but it does seem like a good strategic choice if a major 
target audience is C/C++ users.

I did actually try using it already, just as a glorified text editor, to see
how 
it'd cope with D syntax -- pretty well, apart from not highlighting or 
understanding indentation rules with respect to non-C++ stuff like foreach.

I didn't personally warm to MonoDevelop, but to be fair, I didn't give it much 
of a go.  Maybe I'll reinstall it some time and see how it works out.


 I hope to see MonoD on github/d-programming-language too if it's the case of
 VisualD.


Yes, I think that's a good plan.  I rather hope that all the major IDEs will be 
supported as first-class citizens in the long run.
Sep 07 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 08/09/13 01:22, Flamaros wrote:

 I hope to see MonoD on github/d-programming-language too if it's the case of
 VisualD.


One thing that could help with MonoD would be if it could effectively support 
more than the most recent stable version of MonoDevelop.  Version 3.0 is still 
the one used in many Linux distros.  (4.0 is currently in the "proposed"
updates 
for Ubuntu 13.10, which means it'll probably be the default by the time 13.10
is 
released.)

If VisualD can support VS 2010, 2011 and 2013, it's surely possible for MonoD
to 
do something similar.

I recognize that the developer has provided an Ubuntu PPA for the latest 
MonoDevelop among other resources, but it's preferable not to oblige users to 
add extra archives to their distro.
Sep 08 2013
next sibling parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> writes:
Just for the sake of completeness:

mono is *detested* and considered even more inacceptable than 
java by many linux and (even more) *BSD users.

Actually I *did* try the eclipse D IDE thing ... and found it to 
match my (utterly negative) perception of java (which has pretty 
nothing to do with the D ide and pretty everything with eclipse). 
Concerning Mono-D I heard about it and respect the efforts of the 
creator(s) ... but never even looked at it (and never will until 
hell freezes).

I vaguely remember seeing colleagues work with Visual$$ on 
Windoze and they looked happy and productive to me.
For a reason: Visual$$ seems to serve quite nicely the needs and 
expectations of those developing on Windoze.

For fairness sake:
It's next to impossible to do the same (as Visual$$) on linux/BSD 
due to complexity and a fractured eco system. Gnome and QT/kde 
basically are religious issues and no matter which one one 
chooses one will have a large audience refusing it. Besides both 
are monstrous (and more often than not meet resistance or at the 
very minimum reluctance on the Windoze side). Fox and fltk are 
nice little thingies but not up to (todays) par lacking even 
functionality like printing. And so on.

That's quite regrettable, considering that we have a quite nice 
editor engine (Scintilla), quite good a debugger, and quite good 
compilers for pretty every language around.

That said, maybe my first reaction was too harsh. After all, it's 
not D's job to solve the linux gui troubles.
Having GDC with GDB working and some editors and even IDEs more 
or less working with D, I see that I should walk back a little 
and agree with the proposal (of this thread).

A+ -R
Sep 08 2013
next sibling parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 8 September 2013 22:00, Ramon <spam thanks.no> wrote:

 Just for the sake of completeness:

 mono is *detested* and considered even more inacceptable than java by many
 linux and (even more) *BSD users.


Swings in roundabouts. Also depends what you mean by detest and inacceptable...


From an ethical viewpoint, I think most of it is FUD that still


lingers from back when there was confusion over what Microsoft was


cleared for a while, and I don't believe this represents the overall
view of users/developers - except for those who are still stuck in
2008 mindset.




Regards
-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 08 2013
parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> writes:
On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 21:08:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 ...

 Against because we need a solution for *all* major platforms 
 (Lx32, Lx64,
 *BSD, apple, w32,w64) and I'm worried that this resolution 
 here might lead
 to a "So, we *do* have an IDE. Case closed" attitude.


 Why not cross-platform instead of *just* the major platforms? 
 :o)


Because I have saved at least some crumbs of being realistic *g

I'm btw. *not* against Visual$$ and I *do* know and respect that 
it has a lot of happy and productive followers. MS has definitely 
done something quite right there.
My point isn't "Ignore Visual$$! Hehe" but rather "Please, make 
sure to have happy linux and BSD users, too!".

On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 21:21:37 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 On 8 September 2013 22:00, Ramon <spam thanks.no> wrote:

 Just for the sake of completeness:

 mono is *detested* and considered even more inacceptable than 
 java by many
 linux and (even more) *BSD users.


 Swings in roundabouts. Also depends what you mean by detest and 
 inacceptable...


I'm, afraid it has shown to be quite senseless to resolve such 
issues by analysing and discussing adjectives.


From an ethical viewpoint, I think most of it is FUD that still


 lingers from back when there was confusion over what Microsoft 
 was

 drive all

 been
 cleared for a while, and I don't believe this represents the 
 overall
 view of users/developers - except for those who are still stuck 
 in
 2008 mindset.


Then let me inform you from a practical viewpoint that I'm not 
stupid and ignorant enough to automatically refuse anything from 
MS just because it's from MS. I don't like them and I don't trust 
them a nanometer but I recognize (even publicly) and respect when 
they do something well - like Visual$$.
I'm btw. also advising clients in ca. 85% of cases to forget 
about Linux on the desktop and to use Windoze.
My reasons to "paranoically" avoid Windoze for *myself* are not 
political or religious but purely pragmatic.
tl;dr One is grossly mistaken when seeing myself as linux-taliban 
like anti-MS.

I've talked to Miguel in person and I have solid reasons to not 
consider or touch Mono. Kindly note that I'm not fudding or 
preaching against it - I simply state that I and many others will 
not, no matter matter what, touch it.



 reasons however...


Indeed. And those reasons might sometimes even be related to Mono.

A+ -R
Sep 08 2013
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 08 Sep 2013 23:42:52 +0200
"Ramon" <spam thanks.no> wrote:

 
 tl;dr One is grossly mistaken when seeing myself as linux-taliban 
 like anti-MS.
 


That's fine but you seem to go out of your way to convince people of
the exact opposite. Naturally, that *will* mislead people.
Sep 09 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 9/8/13, Ramon <spam thanks.no> wrote:

 Fox and fltk are
 nice little thingies but not up to (todays) par lacking even
 functionality like printing.


Printing seems like something that should be in a separate library,
and maybe the GUI library would provide a nice interface over its
functionality. I've no idea, but are there no such cross-platform
libraries around?
Sep 08 2013
parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> writes:
On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 21:47:59 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic 
wrote:

 On 9/8/13, Ramon <spam thanks.no> wrote:

 Fox and fltk are
 nice little thingies but not up to (todays) par lacking even
 functionality like printing.


 Printing seems like something that should be in a separate 
 library,
 and maybe the GUI library would provide a nice interface over 
 its
 functionality. I've no idea, but are there no such 
 cross-platform
 libraries around?


For some reason, probably to follow the situation on Windoze, 
printing is considered to belong to or at least to be very 
tightly coupled with the GUI. Technically speaking MS has solved 
printing by drawing to a "special canvas", which is somewhat 
unfortunate but actually not that bad conceptionally.

In part the problem is also to do with linux going another way 
that is smart, too, by somewhat decoupling printing and going for 
postcript.

Unfortunately this approach is quite different from Windoze 
(which still happens to own around 95% of the desktops) and also 
shows troublesome in a world of GDI printers (for many of which 
drivers exist nowadays in linux, too).

 From developers point of view the Windows approach probably looks 
more natural and desirable; after all printing, at least often, 
*is* just drawing on another target (paper rather than screen) 
and, more importantly, postscript is more at the driver side than 
on the creation side.

tl;dr printing should be part of or at least reachable through 
the gui system.


On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 21:47:59 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:

 On Sun, 08 Sep 2013 23:00:17 +0200
 "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> wrote:


 Visual$$ on Windoze


 Let's stick to grown-up words here. I'm not a fan of MS or Win 
 either,
 but every time you write "Windoze" or spell something with $ it 
 does
 nothing to hurt MS/Win and only makes you and other Posix users 
 look
 like immature brats.


Let's stick to the freedom of expressing oneself any (polite) way 
one sees fit as long as it's easily understandable.
For the uninitiated: '$' often indicates a placeholder in nixnux 
world.

With a friendly smile - the brat.

A+ -R
Sep 08 2013
parent "growler" <growlercab gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 22:37:00 UTC, Ramon wrote:

 On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 21:47:59 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic 
 wrote:

 On 9/8/13, Ramon <spam thanks.no> wrote:

 Fox and fltk are
 nice little thingies but not up to (todays) par lacking even
 functionality like printing.


 Printing seems like something that should be in a separate 
 library,
 and maybe the GUI library would provide a nice interface over 
 its
 functionality. I've no idea, but are there no such 
 cross-platform
 libraries around?


 For some reason, probably to follow the situation on Windoze, 
 printing is considered to belong to or at least to be very 
 tightly coupled with the GUI. Technically speaking MS has 
 solved printing by drawing to a "special canvas", which is 
 somewhat unfortunate but actually not that bad conceptionally.

 In part the problem is also to do with linux going another way 
 that is smart, too, by somewhat decoupling printing and going 
 for postcript.


Postscript is/was the industry standard, so of course Linux, 
Unix, FreeBSD and most other OSs support it, including windows.

The "special canvas" in windows is really just another GDI render 
target. Cairo works in a similar way, producing device 
independent output that can then be used with different renderer 
targets, including Postscript, PDF, etc.

G.
Sep 08 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 08 Sep 2013 23:00:17 +0200
"Ramon" <spam thanks.no> wrote:


 Visual$$ on Windoze


Let's stick to grown-up words here. I'm not a fan of MS or Win either,
but every time you write "Windoze" or spell something with $ it does
nothing to hurt MS/Win and only makes you and other Posix users look
like immature brats.
Sep 08 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-08 23:47, Nick Sabalausky wrote:


 Let's stick to grown-up words here. I'm not a fan of MS or Win either,
 but every time you write "Windoze" or spell something with $ it does
 nothing to hurt MS/Win and only makes you and other Posix users look
 like immature brats.


Why do you put him together with the rest of us Posix users, seems a bit 
unfair.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Sep 09 2013
next sibling parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> writes:
On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 07:21:17 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-09-08 23:47, Nick Sabalausky wrote:


 Let's stick to grown-up words here. I'm not a fan of MS or Win 
 either,
 but every time you write "Windoze" or spell something with $ 
 it does
 nothing to hurt MS/Win and only makes you and other Posix 
 users look
 like immature brats.


 Why do you put him together with the rest of us Posix users, 
 seems a bit unfair.


Don't worry, I'm pretty certain he meant only immature-brats like 
myself and not cultivated grown up persons like you.

(Note to myself: In order to get grown-up I should learn to 
insult those whose linguistic habits differ from mine)

Have a beautiful day, everyone :-)
Sep 09 2013
parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 09/09/13 09:31, Ramon wrote:

 (Note to myself: In order to get grown-up I should learn to insult those whose
 linguistic habits differ from mine)


No, but it may help to learn to distinguish between someone saying "You're 
making yourself look like an immature brat," and someone saying you _are_ one.
Sep 09 2013
parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> writes:
On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 09:13:16 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:

 On 09/09/13 09:31, Ramon wrote:

 (Note to myself: In order to get grown-up I should learn to 
 insult those whose
 linguistic habits differ from mine)


 No, but it may help to learn to distinguish between someone 
 saying "You're making yourself look like an immature brat," and 
 someone saying you _are_ one.


Well, to me someone who talks in a negative way about another 
user (or "smartly" works out subtle differences in such remarks) 
rather than about D related issues looks like an idiot.

Isn't it beautiful to experience variety of perception?

I sincerely hope it's not too immature brat looking to suggest 
that we focus on D related issues again.

Thank you so much -R
Sep 09 2013
next sibling parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 09/09/13 11:29, Ramon wrote:

 Well, to me someone who talks in a negative way about another user (or
"smartly"
 works out subtle differences in such remarks) rather than about D related
issues
 looks like an idiot.

 Isn't it beautiful to experience variety of perception?


There's nothing idiotic about asking people to behave civilly and not use 
sarcastic nicknames for other software products, even when one has good reason 
to disapprove of them.  A variety of perception is good, expressing yourself in 
a way that makes people more likely to ignore or dismiss your perception isn't.

Besides, the D community ought to be a friendly environment for developers from 
any platform.  Tolerance for sneering nicknames can be offputting for people 
from the platforms being sneered at -- and if they're less likely to join the 
community as a result, the variety of perception will be decreased.


 I sincerely hope it's not too immature brat looking to suggest that we focus on
 D related issues again.


Making the D community a pleasant place for everyone _is_ a D-related issue.

In my experience it's a very typical problem of technical people in general (I 
don't excuse myself here) that they focus predominantly on technical issues at 
the expense of understanding how their ways of expressing themselves are 
perceived by other people.  The result is very often a lot of unnecessary 
conflict and failure of communication, and a lot of interpersonal grievances 
that are completely avoidable.

This conversation is a good example.  You seem to think that everyone is 
accusing you of being immature.  Actually, this whole thread of conversation is 
an appeal to your maturity -- to your capacity to understand why people are 
concerned about these things, and to adapt accordingly.
Sep 09 2013
parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> writes:
Sorry, Joseph Rushton Wakeling

but this is getting silly.

You see, I try to be polite and to value anyones work. I will 
gladly value your (or Nicks, or ...) views on programming, no 
matter whether I agree with them, I respect your work and will 
gladly take your advise on D related matters.

But not you nor anyone else here will educate me on manners or 
alike. You will not force your private feelings on how one should 
speak upon me. Period.

You or Nick or Carl or whoever finds it insulting when I say 
Windoze because I write it in a way you don't like? Sorry, that's 
ridiculous. Similarly I write Visual$ - the $ meaning "fill in as 
appropriate" - rather than VisualStudio, VisualExpress, 
VisualBasic, VisualNet, VisualWhoKnowsWhat? Ridiculous!

Should I now make some noise, too and complain about imaginary 
insults because you evidently assume that eveyone must know the 
correct product name of some Visual$ even when he doesn't use 
Windoze?

This is getting silly. Let us stop that construed out of thin air 
"problem" ping pong and *really* behave like grown ups that is, 
return to technical issues.


A+ -R
Sep 09 2013
next sibling parent Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 9/9/13, Ramon <spam thanks.no> wrote:

 Windoze because I write it in a way you don't like? Sorry, that's
 ridiculous. Similarly I write Visual$ - the $ meaning "fill in as
 appropriate" - rather than VisualStudio, VisualExpress,
 VisualBasic, VisualNet, VisualWhoKnowsWhat? Ridiculous!


Drop the act.
Sep 09 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
Just in case someone has not understood it already: Ramon is 
using a pretty common trolling approach which can be shortly 
described as "make an insult, interpret any answer as a personal 
insult, appeal to cultural differences, loop". He has been doing 
it since the very first posts here and people are still taking it 
seriously.

Unless someone starts banning people for not being constructive 
(hope it will never happen), only thing that can be done is 
simply ignoring it and focusing on topic. At the very least it 
will help to keep threads less bloated, at most - force him find 
more amusing trolling methods.

Trying to reason with him is exactly what he needs to be able to 
provoke you more.

Peace.
Sep 09 2013
next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 9 September 2013 14:49, Dicebot <public dicebot.lv> wrote:

 Just in case someone has not understood it already: Ramon is using a pretty
 common trolling approach which can be shortly described as "make an insult,
 interpret any answer as a personal insult, appeal to cultural differences,
 loop". He has been doing it since the very first posts here and people are
 still taking it seriously.

 Unless someone starts banning people for not being constructive (hope it
 will never happen), only thing that can be done is simply ignoring it and
 focusing on topic. At the very least it will help to keep threads less
 bloated, at most - force him find more amusing trolling methods.

 Trying to reason with him is exactly what he needs to be able to provoke you
 more.

 Peace.


Being direct isn't helpful either, as it just causes more flames and
provocation.  I think it is generally well agreed here that attacks
and derogatory terms of any kind are not welcome, but this does not
require any form of moderation other than a gentle reminder.

With respect, if you wish your posts to be taken seriously and your
posts to have a more "adult" air to them, then using tired and
somewhat immature terms such as "Visual$, Windoze" etc is not going to
achieve that.  You do not need to use an insulting tone to promote D,
and using such terms only makes you look bad.

Of course, some of us (myself being included as pretty big FSF
advocate) like the GNU/Linux way of doing things better, but as they
say, there's more than one way to cook a goose. Do we really need to
treat people disrespectfully?


Regards
-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 09 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no> writes:
Wow. So many people turning so many circles around so little as 
"ze" instead of "ws".

What's your objective in all this? To make me nicely say 
"Windows" as desired by you? A storm in the tea pot for 2 letters?

If that is "grown up" I'd prefer to be an "immature brat".

Is it enough, now? Can we finally return to technical issues? Or 
are some more "grown up" circles needed?

(Note: This is not in response to dicebot specifially)

 dicebot

I'm generous enough to not feel insulted by your repeated "troll" 
accusations. Sure enough this is just another symbol of being 
grown up ;)
Sep 09 2013
parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 09/09/13 16:06, Ramon wrote:

 Wow. So many people turning so many circles around so little as "ze" instead of
 "ws".


Why is a little "ze" as opposed to a "ws" so important to you that you choose
to 
persist in using it even though lots of people have suggested to you that it's 
impolite?
Sep 09 2013
prev sibling parent reply "develop32" <develop32 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 09:29:11 UTC, Ramon wrote:

 Well, to me someone who talks in a negative way about another 
 user (or "smartly" works out subtle differences in such 
 remarks) rather than about D related issues looks like an idiot.


You do understand that by saying Windoze you *are* insulting 
users that use that platform?

On a related note, I am using VisualD for more than a year and 
I'm happy that it will get a bigger support.
Sep 09 2013
parent "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 10:15:13 UTC, develop32 wrote:

 On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 09:29:11 UTC, Ramon wrote:

 Well, to me someone who talks in a negative way about another 
 user (or "smartly" works out subtle differences in such 
 remarks) rather than about D related issues looks like an 
 idiot.


 You do understand that by saying Windoze you *are* insulting 
 users that use that platform?

 On a related note, I am using VisualD for more than a year and 
 I'm happy that it will get a bigger support.


Maybe he should discuss D issues on Slashdot...
Sep 09 2013
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Mon, 09 Sep 2013 09:21:16 +0200
Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:


 On 2013-09-08 23:47, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 

 Let's stick to grown-up words here. I'm not a fan of MS or Win
 either, but every time you write "Windoze" or spell something with
 $ it does nothing to hurt MS/Win and only makes you and other Posix
 users look like immature brats.


 
 Why do you put him together with the rest of us Posix users, seems a
 bit unfair.
 


Huh? What are you talking about? I'm not grouping anyone with anything.
When non-Windows users go saying things like "Windoze" or "M$" or
anything like that, it makes non-Windows users look bad. Makes it a lot
easier for people to be dismissive of OSS (or anything non-MS) when
we've trained them to associate it with immaturity like that.
Sep 09 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-09 12:47, Nick Sabalausky wrote:


 Huh? What are you talking about? I'm not grouping anyone with anything.
 When non-Windows users go saying things like "Windoze" or "M$" or
 anything like that, it makes non-Windows users look bad. Makes it a lot
 easier for people to be dismissive of OSS (or anything non-MS) when
 we've trained them to associate it with immaturity like that.


Sorry, I might have misunderstood what you wrote.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Sep 10 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 08/09/13 23:21, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 From an ethical viewpoint, I think most of it is FUD that still
 lingers from back when there was confusion over what Microsoft was


 cleared for a while, and I don't believe this represents the overall
 view of users/developers - except for those who are still stuck in
 2008 mindset.



Linux 
ecosystem, it'd provide a means for Microsoft to take everyone down via patent 
lawsuits.  It's still theoretically a risk, but I think strategically Microsoft 
seems to have reconsidered that approach.
Sep 08 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On Sep 8, 2013 11:49 PM, "Joseph Rushton Wakeling" <
joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> wrote:

 On 08/09/13 23:21, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 From an ethical viewpoint, I think most of it is FUD that still
 lingers from back when there was confusion over what Microsoft was


 cleared for a while, and I don't believe this represents the overall
 view of users/developers - except for those who are still stuck in
 2008 mindset.






the Linux ecosystem, it'd provide a means for Microsoft to take everyone
down via patent lawsuits.  It's still theoretically a risk, but I think
strategically Microsoft seems to have reconsidered that approach.



http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-334.htm ) and
the common language infrastructure (CLI)  (
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm )
have been standardised for some time now, so that aspect is safe from

- such as the cryptography library.

Regards
-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 02:03, Iain Buclaw wrote:


 http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-334.htm ) and the
 common language infrastructure (CLI)  (
 http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm ) have
 been standardised for some time now, so that aspect is safe from Microsoft.  
It

 cryptography library.


Given recent revelations, I'm not sure that crypto library should be used
anyway 
... :-)



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 23:00 +0200, Ramon wrote:

 Just for the sake of completeness:
=20
 mono is *detested* and considered even more inacceptable than=20
 java by many linux and (even more) *BSD users.


It also appears that Microsoft are beginning to think the whole CLR
thing is on it's last legs.


in fact but also had a lot of FUD associated with it.  The "Mono hatred"
stemmed from that. So will Microsoft go after Mono with patent suits if

income stream, but it is unlikely to be profitable and so may be not.

Without solid support from Microsoft the C#F





 Actually I *did* try the eclipse D IDE thing ... and found it to=20
 match my (utterly negative) perception of java (which has pretty=20
 nothing to do with the D ide and pretty everything with eclipse).=20
 Concerning Mono-D I heard about it and respect the efforts of the=20
 creator(s) ... but never even looked at it (and never will until=20
 hell freezes).


Eclipse is a monster, but once you get used to it, it can be good. I do
not use CDT, but I do use Eclipse sometimes for Java, Groovy, Scala and
Python. Eclipse has users because it is "corporate", and free.
Organizations , especially Java related ones, have basically made
Eclipse the core tool. However IntelliJ IDEA has a much more vocal
following mostly because it works better than Eclipse for them, and they
have to pay for it. I use IntelliJ IDEA sometimes for Java, Groovy and
Scala, and PyCharm sometimes for Python. (The IDE editors are still
nowhere near as good as Emacs (and VIM), but IDEs are great for
debugging. So I use Emacs most of the time for editing and the IDE in
the rare occasions I actually have to debug.)

Interesting to note that Android has switched from Eclipse to IntelliJ
IDEA as the base for the Android development platform.


a huge amount of dependencies. My problem is I do not understand how the
"Solution" system is the same or different to everyone else's "Project"
system. I guess I do not have much enthusiasm to find out as I can just
use Emacs.


 I vaguely remember seeing colleagues work with Visual$$ on=20
 Windoze and they looked happy and productive to me.
 For a reason: Visual$$ seems to serve quite nicely the needs and=20
 expectations of those developing on Windoze.



If Windows and Java then (Eclipse of IntelliJ IDEA)

So if D is to compete with C++ on Windows, a D plugin for Visual Studio
has to be in place and enjoyably usable.


 For fairness sake:
 It's next to impossible to do the same (as Visual$$) on linux/BSD=20
 due to complexity and a fractured eco system. Gnome and QT/kde=20
 basically are religious issues and no matter which one one=20
 chooses one will have a large audience refusing it. Besides both=20
 are monstrous (and more often than not meet resistance or at the=20
 very minimum reluctance on the Windoze side). Fox and fltk are=20
 nice little thingies but not up to (todays) par lacking even=20
 functionality like printing. And so on.


GNOME vs. Qt may be religious to certain parties, but most people choose
either GNOME or KDE for the desktop and then load the other widget set
as well. I use GNOME but I have a many Qt-based things on here and
indeed develop PySide and PyQt5 based systems since GNOME is a
non-starter on Windows and OS X. Pragmatism is the order of the day here
not religious fervour.=20

For Go I use the Eclipse Go perspective, but more usually LiteIDE which
is a Qt-based system that works fine on GNOME =E2=80=93 and OS X and Window=
s.
wxWidgets used to be interesting but wxPython is not shifting to Python
3 so it is effectively dead. Phoenix is trying to create a Python 3
binding for wxWidgets but it is not finished yet. If it makes it then
wxWidgets re-enters my use sphere.

I think that now that Qt has escaped from
Microsoft^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HNokia, it will return to being one of the two
primary system for cross-platform GUI systems, wxWidgets being the
other. Thus I think QtD (fot Qt4 and Qt5) should be seen as an essential
component of the D milieu.  wxD should also get some presence. It is
great we have GtkD, but I cannot see it ever having any cross-platform
traction.


 That's quite regrettable, considering that we have a quite nice=20
 editor engine (Scintilla), quite good a debugger, and quite good=20
 compilers for pretty every language around.
=20
 That said, maybe my first reaction was too harsh. After all, it's=20
 not D's job to solve the linux gui troubles.
 Having GDC with GDB working and some editors and even IDEs more=20
 or less working with D, I see that I should walk back a little=20
 and agree with the proposal (of this thread).
=20
 A+ -R


--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



 next sibling parent reply "Ramon" <spam thanks.no>  writes:


On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 08:29:44 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:

 ...

 VisualStudio.
 If Windows and Java then (Eclipse of IntelliJ IDEA)



I understand the point about Visual$. While I myself hardly know 
it, very many (quite possibly the majority) of programmers on 
Windoze use it and seem to be quite happy with it. That's reason 
enough for me to accept it.

This, however, is (to me) the really interesting point


 So if D is to compete with C++ on Windows, a D plugin for 
 Visual Studio
 has to be in place and enjoyably usable.


Is it? Why compete? The only way to attracts large numbers of C++ 
developers is to become more and more like C++ (incl. of course, 
massive amounts of libraries and tools) and to end up as some 
kind of C+++.

Python is similar to - nothing (commonly used) - and yet it grew 
wildly. There are so many to complain about Python's weird 
indentation syntax. And yet they come and use it. Because it 
promises something tangible and it delivers. Because there is 
"the Python way". Because there excellent docs. And because there 
is no real competitor.
Had van Rossum tried to please the perl crowd, he might have 
attracted some more and quicker but today Python would be a small 
niche thingy nobody'd care much about.

I feel we should largely ignore C++. I feel that D is grossly 
inconsequent in a) - very smartly - aiming to be what C++ wanted 
to be and b) - not at all smartly - trying to please the C++ 
crowd and to mimick C++ up to the point of at least seriously 
considering mimicking leper and plague of C++, too.

D already *is* what C++ wanted to be, namely a more modern C with 
OO. D shouldn't measure itself against C++ but rather against 
what C++ wanted to be.

And there is another immensely important factor: reliability and 
safety.

This world gets ever more dependent on software - and software is 
ever more recognized as unreliable and insecure; hell, there is 
even an industry living from that (anti virus, anti-malware, etc, 
etc).

THAT's the sweet spot. To be what C++ wanted to be - plus - a 
strong focus on reliability and safety.

The Ada people are not stupid. There is a good reason for them to 
ponder a year or longer over a new keyword. Bertrand Meyer may 
have it implemented in a way that looks strange to many but that 
man isn't stupid at all. The lesson to learn from those two 
languages known for reliability? Have a tight definition and 
think long and hard before you make the slightest changes. And 
*always* keep your "guiding principles" in mind.


A+ -R



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 11:07 +0200, Ramon wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 Is it? Why compete? The only way to attracts large numbers of C++=20
 developers is to become more and more like C++ (incl. of course,=20
 massive amounts of libraries and tools) and to end up as some=20
 kind of C+++.


The "space of the game" is native code applications. The players
currently are Fortran, C, C++, D, Go, Rust, Haskell, OCaml. There are
others but they are second division rather than first division. Thus,
almost by definition D is competing with C++ for use statistics.


 Python is similar to - nothing (commonly used) - and yet it grew=20
 wildly. There are so many to complain about Python's weird=20
 indentation syntax. And yet they come and use it. Because it=20
 promises something tangible and it delivers. Because there is=20
 "the Python way". Because there excellent docs. And because there=20
 is no real competitor.


I agree, currently, and quite bizarrely, Python is unique amongst
programming languages in that it is seen as the natural partner of
native code components.


 Had van Rossum tried to please the perl crowd, he might have=20
 attracted some more and quicker but today Python would be a small=20
 niche thingy nobody'd care much about.


Python and Perl did compete but they did so head on. It was a
philosophical "head on" so compromise was never an issue!


 I feel we should largely ignore C++. I feel that D is grossly=20
 inconsequent in a) - very smartly - aiming to be what C++ wanted=20
 to be and b) - not at all smartly - trying to please the C++=20
 crowd and to mimick C++ up to the point of at least seriously=20
 considering mimicking leper and plague of C++, too.
=20
 D already *is* what C++ wanted to be, namely a more modern C with=20
 OO. D shouldn't measure itself against C++ but rather against=20
 what C++ wanted to be.
=20
 And there is another immensely important factor: reliability and=20
 safety.
=20
 This world gets ever more dependent on software - and software is=20
 ever more recognized as unreliable and insecure; hell, there is=20
 even an industry living from that (anti virus, anti-malware, etc,=20
 etc).
=20
 THAT's the sweet spot. To be what C++ wanted to be - plus - a=20
 strong focus on reliability and safety.


C++11 has revitalized C++ in ways that are only just showing themselves.
This is a threat to D gaining traction. I am confident D can win the
battle for the hearts and minds of native code programmers over C++, but
it remains a "head to head" and C++ is established and accepted. D is
the newcomer and has to dislodge entrenched position.

There will be an interesting analogy with Java 8 in JVM land.


 The Ada people are not stupid. There is a good reason for them to=20
 ponder a year or longer over a new keyword. Bertrand Meyer may=20
 have it implemented in a way that looks strange to many but that=20
 man isn't stupid at all. The lesson to learn from those two=20
 languages known for reliability? Have a tight definition and=20
 think long and hard before you make the slightest changes. And=20
 *always* keep your "guiding principles" in mind.


Ada and Eiffel are niche languages, Eiffel more so than Ada. Whether
good, bad, or doesn't matter this is the case: they are languages used
in a very small domain, and even there C++ is allowed.

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 9/9/2013 11:35 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 C++11 has revitalized C++ in ways that are only just showing themselves.


That's true.


 This is a threat to D gaining traction.


I'm less sure about that. I think it presents an opportunity for us. Driving
the 
C++ resurgence is:

1. demand for high performance computing

2. turning back towards native languages

3. recognition of the value of functional-style programming techniques

4. recognition of the value of safety, encapsulation, etc.

But regarding the latter two points, I don't buy that the new C++ delivers. The 
classic is a oneliner Andrei wrote:

     void fun() noexcept { throw "so sue me"; }

noexcept means the function doesn't throw any exceptions. But it doesn't check! 
The above code compiles, and then fails at runtime. The opportunity for D is to 
deliver what C++ has promised.



 Sep 10 2013



 next sibling parent reply "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 21:25:41 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 On 9/9/2013 11:35 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 C++11 has revitalized C++ in ways that are only just showing 
 themselves.


 That's true.


 This is a threat to D gaining traction.


 I'm less sure about that. I think it presents an opportunity 
 for us. Driving the C++ resurgence is:

 1. demand for high performance computing

 2. turning back towards native languages

 3. recognition of the value of functional-style programming 
 techniques

 4. recognition of the value of safety, encapsulation, etc.

 But regarding the latter two points, I don't buy that the new 
 C++ delivers. The classic is a oneliner Andrei wrote:

     void fun() noexcept { throw "so sue me"; }

 noexcept means the function doesn't throw any exceptions. But 
 it doesn't check! The above code compiles, and then fails at 
 runtime. The opportunity for D is to deliver what C++ has 
 promised.



I think it is better to sell D's capabilities in terms of systems 
programming scenarios.

Your 1-4 points are already covered by existing languages for 
traditional line of business applications, specially given the 
fact that even current VM based languages have native compilers 
available.

Putted another way, how well do the 1 - 4 bullet points stand 


This is why I think the best selling point is systems programming.

--
Paulo



 Sep 10 2013



 next sibling parent  "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv>  writes:


On Wednesday, 11 September 2013 at 06:58:03 UTC, PauloPinto wrote:

 I think it is better to sell D's capabilities in terms of 
 systems programming scenarios.

 Your 1-4 points are already covered by existing languages for 
 traditional line of business applications, specially given the 
 fact that even current VM based languages have native compilers 
 available.

 Putted another way, how well do the 1 - 4 bullet points stand 


 This is why I think the best selling point is systems 
 programming.


Music to my ears.



 Sep 11 2013



prev sibling  parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>  writes:


On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 08:57:59 +0200
"PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:


 On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 21:25:41 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:

 On 9/9/2013 11:35 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 C++11 has revitalized C++ in ways that are only just showing 
 themselves.


 That's true.


 This is a threat to D gaining traction.


 I'm less sure about that. I think it presents an opportunity 
 for us. Driving the C++ resurgence is:

 1. demand for high performance computing

 2. turning back towards native languages

 3. recognition of the value of functional-style programming 
 techniques

 4. recognition of the value of safety, encapsulation, etc.


 
 Your 1-4 points are already covered by existing languages for 
 traditional line of business applications, specially given the 
 fact that even current VM based languages have native compilers 
 available.
 
 Putted another way, how well do the 1 - 4 bullet points stand 

 



languages) are *both* about these two things:

A. Lack of the VM "middleman" sucking up resources.

B. Low-level capabilities.

The native compilers for VM languages (With the possible exception of

at point "B".

Giving a VM language a native compiler is only going half-way. The
language itself is geared towards, and therefore limited by, the need
to be runnable in a VM. That places inherent limitations on the
potential benefits of native compilation. So while it's technically
native-compiled, it's just bolted-on as an afterthought.

Just because I add a turbocharger to a sedan doesn't mean it's
comparable to a McLaren or a Bugatti.



 Sep 11 2013



  parent reply "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 06:58:53 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:

 On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 08:57:59 +0200
 "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:


 On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 21:25:41 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:

 On 9/9/2013 11:35 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 C++11 has revitalized C++ in ways that are only just 
 showing themselves.


 That's true.


 This is a threat to D gaining traction.


 I'm less sure about that. I think it presents an opportunity 
 for us. Driving the C++ resurgence is:

 1. demand for high performance computing

 2. turning back towards native languages

 3. recognition of the value of functional-style programming 
 techniques

 4. recognition of the value of safety, encapsulation, etc.


 
 Your 1-4 points are already covered by existing languages for 
 traditional line of business applications, specially given the 
 fact that even current VM based languages have native 
 compilers available.
 
 Putted another way, how well do the 1 - 4 bullet points stand 

 



 native
 languages) are *both* about these two things:

 A. Lack of the VM "middleman" sucking up resources.

 B. Low-level capabilities.

 The native compilers for VM languages (With the possible 
 exception of

 awkward
 at point "B".

 Giving a VM language a native compiler is only going half-way. 
 The
 language itself is geared towards, and therefore limited by, 
 the need
 to be runnable in a VM. That places inherent limitations on the
 potential benefits of native compilation. So while it's 
 technically
 native-compiled, it's just bolted-on as an afterthought.

 Just because I add a turbocharger to a sedan doesn't mean it's
 comparable to a McLaren or a Bugatti.


I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile Java, 


How it is different from compiling Apple/Object/Turbo/Think 
Pascal, Delphi, Modula-2, Modula-3, Ada, OCaml, Oberon, Haskell, 
D, Go, Rust to native code?

There is no VM about it, other than implementation details.

Is the lack of access to processor resources what makes some of 
them VM languages?

Then even ANSI C is a VM language, given that what gives the 
language lower hardware access capabilities are all language 
extensions.

--
Paulo



 Sep 12 2013



 next sibling parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com>  writes:


On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 11:30:57 UTC, PauloPinto wrote:

 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile 



Compiling such language to native code require horribly 
convoluted code generation. For instance, an helloworld in java 
compilled natively with gcj gives you a 50Mb (!) binary blob.



 Sep 12 2013



 next sibling parent reply "Trent" <anon nope.avi>  writes:


On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 15:55:26 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 11:30:57 UTC, PauloPinto 
 wrote:

 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile 



 Compiling such language to native code require horribly 
 convoluted code generation. For instance, an helloworld in java 
 compilled natively with gcj gives you a 50Mb (!) binary blob.


GCJ also doesn't offer improved performance over the JVM for 
non-trivial code. It will reduce the startup time, since no JIT 
is needed, but beyond that it doesn't really offer benefits.

Not sure about other VM->native compilation



 Sep 12 2013



 next sibling parent reply "Adam Wilson" <flyboynw gmail.com>  writes:


On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:22:18 -0700, Trent <anon nope.avi> wrote:


 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 15:55:26 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 11:30:57 UTC, PauloPinto wrote:

 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile Java,  



 Compiling such language to native code require horribly convoluted code  
 generation. For instance, an helloworld in java compilled natively with  
 gcj gives you a 50Mb (!) binary blob.


 GCJ also doesn't offer improved performance over the JVM for non-trivial  
 code. It will reduce the startup time, since no JIT is needed, but  
 beyond that it doesn't really offer benefits.

 Not sure about other VM->native compilation


Microsoft built the Singularity OS using a special full-native compiler  

would release to the public: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sing_Sharp

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/



 Sep 12 2013



  parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 12.09.2013 18:45, schrieb Adam Wilson:

 On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:22:18 -0700, Trent <anon nope.avi> wrote:


 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 15:55:26 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 11:30:57 UTC, PauloPinto wrote:

 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile Java,



 Compiling such language to native code require horribly convoluted
 code generation. For instance, an helloworld in java compilled
 natively with gcj gives you a 50Mb (!) binary blob.


 GCJ also doesn't offer improved performance over the JVM for
 non-trivial code. It will reduce the startup time, since no JIT is
 needed, but beyond that it doesn't really offer benefits.

 Not sure about other VM->native compilation


 Microsoft built the Singularity OS using a special full-native compiler

 they would release to the public: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sing_Sharp


You mean this?

http://singularity.codeplex.com/

--
Paulo



 Sep 12 2013



  parent  "Adam Wilson" <flyboynw gmail.com>  writes:


On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 11:47:02 -0700, Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  
wrote:


 Am 12.09.2013 18:45, schrieb Adam Wilson:

 On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:22:18 -0700, Trent <anon nope.avi> wrote:


 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 15:55:26 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 11:30:57 UTC, PauloPinto wrote:

 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile Java,



 Compiling such language to native code require horribly convoluted
 code generation. For instance, an helloworld in java compilled
 natively with gcj gives you a 50Mb (!) binary blob.


 GCJ also doesn't offer improved performance over the JVM for
 non-trivial code. It will reduce the startup time, since no JIT is
 needed, but beyond that it doesn't really offer benefits.

 Not sure about other VM->native compilation


 Microsoft built the Singularity OS using a special full-native compiler

 they would release to the public:  
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sing_Sharp


 You mean this?

 http://singularity.codeplex.com/

 --
 Paulo



class too. To bad it's license to so restrictive as to be unusable....

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/



 Sep 12 2013



prev sibling  parent  Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 12.09.2013 18:22, schrieb Trent:

 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 15:55:26 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 11:30:57 UTC, PauloPinto wrote:

 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile Java,



 Compiling such language to native code require horribly convoluted
 code generation. For instance, an helloworld in java compilled
 natively with gcj gives you a 50Mb (!) binary blob.


 GCJ also doesn't offer improved performance over the JVM for non-trivial
 code. It will reduce the startup time, since no JIT is needed, but
 beyond that it doesn't really offer benefits.

 Not sure about other VM->native compilation


It is a waste of time to bring up gcj as an example, it is an outdated 
compiler, frozen in time (2009), where not much effort was spent in 
optimizing code.

If one wants to compare performance of Java native compilers, Aonix,
Excelsior JET and Websphere Real Time JVM are better examples.

Again there is no such thing as VM -> native compilation, it is always
an implementation decision.

I really hate all this VM/Managed code concepts introduced by 
Sun/Microsoft. Before we used to discuss implementation techniques
for programming languages, compiled/interpreted/jitted, not VM vs native.

--
Paulo



 Sep 12 2013



prev sibling  parent  Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 12.09.2013 17:55, schrieb deadalnix:

 On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 11:30:57 UTC, PauloPinto wrote:

 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile Java,



 Compiling such language to native code require horribly convoluted code
 generation. For instance, an helloworld in java compilled natively with
 gcj gives you a 50Mb (!) binary blob.


gcj is a lame example. The project is dead since 2009 and they hardly 
invested anything into optimizing compiler. Just blindly translating 
bytecodes directly to processor instructions.

Native code generation has *nothing* to do with binary size. Have you 
tried to statically compile similar examples in other languages?

Lets use Oberon as an example for my native point.

GC enabled systems programming language created to write operating 
systems. So same space as D, but also same space as Java and Go because
it does not allow disabling the GC.

Wirt used it to write Native Oberon, originally targeting the Ceres 
workstation at Zurich Technical University. System that was used for a 
few years by students and professors, even for daily desktop tasks.

At ETHZ, there were native code compilers for Oberon, interpreters and
they even played with the idea of JIT compiling dynamic modules on load
using a kernel level JIT.

So does Oberon use require VM ?

If one wants to misuse the VM term to mean runtime library, then all 
high level languages have a VM even ANSI C.


--
Paulo



 Sep 12 2013



prev sibling  parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>  writes:


On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 13:30:55 +0200
"PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:

 
 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile Java, 

 
 How it is different from compiling Apple/Object/Turbo/Think 
 Pascal, Delphi, Modula-2, Modula-3, Ada, OCaml, Oberon, Haskell, 
 D, Go, Rust to native code?
 
 There is no VM about it, other than implementation details.
 
 Is the lack of access to processor resources what makes some of 
 them VM languages?
 
 Then even ANSI C is a VM language, given that what gives the 
 language lower hardware access capabilities are all language 
 extensions.
 


Let me try to clarify my main point, since I may have been a bit
unclear:

I don't really mean to debate "VM vs native" here; I'm aware (as you
are) that a normally-VMed language can be made to be every bit as fast
and powerful as any normally-native-compiled language. Heck, all you
need is a VM that interprets/JITs the LLVM's bytecode, and then bam,
all of a sudden C/C++ are VM languages.

That "VM vs native" isn't what I was really trying to address. I was
only trying to address a couple very specific points in your and

And not *all* normally-VM languages in general, but specifically ones
along those particular lines (frankly, the more popular ones).

Walter had said:


 I think [the C++ resurgence] presents an opportunity 
 for [D]. Driving the C++ resurgence is:

 1. demand for high performance computing

 2. turning back towards native languages

 3. recognition of the value of functional-style programming 
 techniques

 4. recognition of the value of safety, encapsulation, etc.



but also by several normally-VMed languages (to varying levels of
success).

However, and this is the core of what I was trying to say: I'm
disputing that most of those other popular normally-VMed languages

that goes like this:


  *partly* about avoiding the runtime/startup costs of
  interpretation/JIT, but it's *also* about being able to reach down to
  the low-level when necessary (pointers, reinterpret casts, manual
  memory management, etc.)


  the same duality: It's *partly* about performance, but *also* about
  being able to access the hardware (ex: drivers, OS-level stuff,
  certain embedded systems, reduced electricity usage, reduced memory
  footprint (ex: for phones/tablets with little or no virtual mem),
  etc.)

- While it's certainly *possible* for a normally-VMed language to offer
  full low-level abilities, most of them don't (or at least most of the

  usually (ever?) do it on a level that's on par with C/C++/D.

And I think the fact that most normally-VMed languages lack, or skimp
on, low-level abilities is no coincidence: There's a natural tendency
for that specifically because two of the main reasons for using a VM in
the first place are A, the safety of being banned from low-level access
and B, the increased cross-platform portability achieved by not
accessing low-level. Again, it's not that normally-VMed languages

they *typically* don't, and even when they do it's typically (if ever?)
not up-to-par with C/C++/D.



 Sep 12 2013



  parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 12.09.2013 23:58, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:

 On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 13:30:55 +0200
 "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:

 I don't get the point, what there is VM like when I compile Java,


 How it is different from compiling Apple/Object/Turbo/Think
 Pascal, Delphi, Modula-2, Modula-3, Ada, OCaml, Oberon, Haskell,
 D, Go, Rust to native code?

 There is no VM about it, other than implementation details.

 Is the lack of access to processor resources what makes some of
 them VM languages?

 Then even ANSI C is a VM language, given that what gives the
 language lower hardware access capabilities are all language
 extensions.


 Let me try to clarify my main point, since I may have been a bit
 unclear:

 I don't really mean to debate "VM vs native" here; I'm aware (as you
 are) that a normally-VMed language can be made to be every bit as fast
 and powerful as any normally-native-compiled language. Heck, all you
 need is a VM that interprets/JITs the LLVM's bytecode, and then bam,
 all of a sudden C/C++ are VM languages.

 That "VM vs native" isn't what I was really trying to address. I was
 only trying to address a couple very specific points in your and

 And not *all* normally-VM languages in general, but specifically ones
 along those particular lines (frankly, the more popular ones).

 Walter had said:


 I think [the C++ resurgence] presents an opportunity
 for [D]. Driving the C++ resurgence is:

 1. demand for high performance computing

 2. turning back towards native languages

 3. recognition of the value of functional-style programming
 techniques

 4. recognition of the value of safety, encapsulation, etc.



 but also by several normally-VMed languages (to varying levels of
 success).

 However, and this is the core of what I was trying to say: I'm
 disputing that most of those other popular normally-VMed languages

 that goes like this:


    *partly* about avoiding the runtime/startup costs of
    interpretation/JIT, but it's *also* about being able to reach down to
    the low-level when necessary (pointers, reinterpret casts, manual
    memory management, etc.)


    the same duality: It's *partly* about performance, but *also* about
    being able to access the hardware (ex: drivers, OS-level stuff,
    certain embedded systems, reduced electricity usage, reduced memory
    footprint (ex: for phones/tablets with little or no virtual mem),
    etc.)

 - While it's certainly *possible* for a normally-VMed language to offer
    full low-level abilities, most of them don't (or at least most of the

    usually (ever?) do it on a level that's on par with C/C++/D.

 And I think the fact that most normally-VMed languages lack, or skimp
 on, low-level abilities is no coincidence: There's a natural tendency
 for that specifically because two of the main reasons for using a VM in
 the first place are A, the safety of being banned from low-level access
 and B, the increased cross-platform portability achieved by not
 accessing low-level. Again, it's not that normally-VMed languages

 they *typically* don't, and even when they do it's typically (if ever?)
 not up-to-par with C/C++/D.


My point is that there are too many few use cases, D would shine against
mainstream languages, assuming the existence of native compilers for 
said languages.


developers, in the hypothetical case .NET 5 would be native code, given 
the going native trend at Microsoft?

I would say the selling points would mainly be:

- system level programming features outside what unsafe blocks allow for 

- meta-programming abilities
- more friendly ways to manage memory manually

All capabilities related to low level coding.

--
Paulo



 Sep 15 2013



  parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com>  writes:


On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 16:41:43 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 I would say the selling points would mainly be:

 - system level programming features outside what unsafe blocks 

 - meta-programming abilities
 - more friendly ways to manage memory manually


- slices !


 All capabilities related to low level coding.

 --
 Paulo





 Sep 15 2013



  parent  Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>  writes:


On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 18:56:32 +0200
"deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> wrote:


 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 16:41:43 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 I would say the selling points would mainly be:

 - system level programming features outside what unsafe blocks 

 - meta-programming abilities
 - more friendly ways to manage memory manually


 
 - slices !
 

 All capabilities related to low level coding.




Yea, pretty much those things, although metaprogramming is much more
than being a "low level tool", it's very much about productivity.

I might also add "no need for mono on non-MS platforms", just because
my understanding is that mono's not as mature/complete and doesn't get
as much attention or end-user installations as .NET. But I could
be wrong though: I've haven't actually used mono except once in a failed
attempt to run a specific VB.NET-based app on Linux a couple years ago.



 Sep 18 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  1100110 <0b1100110 gmail.com>  writes:


On 09/10/2013 04:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 9/9/2013 11:35 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 C++11 has revitalized C++ in ways that are only just showing themselves.


 That's true.


 This is a threat to D gaining traction.


 I'm less sure about that. I think it presents an opportunity for us.
 Driving the C++ resurgence is:

 1. demand for high performance computing

 2. turning back towards native languages

 3. recognition of the value of functional-style programming techniques

 4. recognition of the value of safety, encapsulation, etc.

 But regarding the latter two points, I don't buy that the new C++
 delivers. The classic is a oneliner Andrei wrote:

      void fun() noexcept { throw "so sue me"; }

 noexcept means the function doesn't throw any exceptions. But it doesn't
 check! The above code compiles, and then fails at runtime. The
 opportunity for D is to deliver what C++ has promised.


Well that's almost completely useless.
About like static typing if the compiler didn't actually check it.



 Oct 03 2013



prev sibling  parent  Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com>  writes:


On 9/10/13, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 noexcept means the function doesn't throw any exceptions. But it doesn't
 check!
 The above code compiles, and then fails at runtime. The opportunity for D is
 to
 deliver what C++ has promised.


I wish we called it 'noexcept' as well instead of 'nothrow', because
Throwables and Errors are still allowed to escape. When you're
interfacing with other languages (e.g. passing a callback), you have
to make sure *no* exceptions escape in the C callback. Marking the
callback with nothrow only gets us one step close to that.



 Oct 03 2013



prev sibling  parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 09.09.2013 10:29, schrieb Russel Winder:

 On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 23:00 +0200, Ramon wrote:

 Just for the sake of completeness:

 mono is *detested* and considered even more inacceptable than
 java by many linux and (even more) *BSD users.


 It also appears that Microsoft are beginning to think the whole CLR
 thing is on it's last legs.


 in fact but also had a lot of FUD associated with it.  The "Mono hatred"
 stemmed from that. So will Microsoft go after Mono with patent suits if

 income stream, but it is unlikely to be profitable and so may be not.

 Without solid support from Microsoft the C#F



 ...


I wonder where you got this idea from.

.NET is pretty strong at Microsoft conferences, even this year BUILD had 
lots of new goodies announced.

They can decide to target the WinRT runtime instead of the CLR, go fully
native instead of generating MSIL bytecodes, or keep using CLR.

There are lots of options still open and as someone that is active in 
both JVM and .NET worlds, I don't see .NET slowing down in the 
enterprise space. Pretty much the contrary actually, looking at the
requests for proposals my employer receives.


--
Paulo



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 18:31 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 I wonder where you got this idea from.


It may just be FUD, but=E2=80=A6


 .NET is pretty strong at Microsoft conferences, even this year BUILD had=


=20

 lots of new goodies announced.
=20
 They can decide to target the WinRT runtime instead of the CLR, go fully
 native instead of generating MSIL bytecodes, or keep using CLR.


There appears to be a lowering of the CLR position in the Microsoft
public stances, and a rise of the native position (mostly C++).
Clearly .NET remains a strong Microsoft technology in the short term,
but it has not really achieved the penetration recently that perhaps it
should. Many organizations I deal with are planning to replace CLR-based
technologies.


leaf nodes, are switching to Scala at the centre and Python at the leaf
nodes. I present as personal evidence the amount of training work I am
doing, but others are reporting similar. Admittedly this is areas where
number crunching is an important component. So instead of CLR, there is
a focus on JVM and native for crunching and Python for control and
visualization. D could be a strong part of this and I keep making
miniature technical marketing pitches whenever possible, but the C++
codes are already in place, and their strategy is already in place.


 There are lots of options still open and as someone that is active in=20
 both JVM and .NET worlds, I don't see .NET slowing down in the=20
 enterprise space. Pretty much the contrary actually, looking at the
 requests for proposals my employer receives.


Clearly we are in very different sectors. Everywhere I am going JVM and
native is displacing CLR. I can quite happily believe both our
observations are correct!


PS It has not passed my notice that revolutionary technical change often
follows from the appointment of new CTOs, not necessarily from any
burning need to change the technology. However it is sometimes easier to
put in place needed replacement of components by revolutionary rather
than evolutionary methods.
--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



 next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org>  writes:


On 9/9/13 11:17 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 18:31 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 […]

 I wonder where you got this idea from.


 It may just be FUD, but…


 .NET is pretty strong at Microsoft conferences, even this year BUILD had
 lots of new goodies announced.

 They can decide to target the WinRT runtime instead of the CLR, go fully
 native instead of generating MSIL bytecodes, or keep using CLR.


 There appears to be a lowering of the CLR position in the Microsoft
 public stances, and a rise of the native position (mostly C++).
 Clearly .NET remains a strong Microsoft technology in the short term,
 but it has not really achieved the penetration recently that perhaps it
 should.


I concur in the sentiment. My perception is that the new Windows 8 
architecture (forgot the name... that layered thing) downplays CLR.


Andrei



 Sep 09 2013



  parent  Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 09.09.2013 22:51, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:

 On 9/9/13 11:17 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 18:31 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 […]

 I wonder where you got this idea from.


 It may just be FUD, but…


 .NET is pretty strong at Microsoft conferences, even this year BUILD had
 lots of new goodies announced.

 They can decide to target the WinRT runtime instead of the CLR, go fully
 native instead of generating MSIL bytecodes, or keep using CLR.


 There appears to be a lowering of the CLR position in the Microsoft
 public stances, and a rise of the native position (mostly C++).
 Clearly .NET remains a strong Microsoft technology in the short term,
 but it has not really achieved the penetration recently that perhaps it
 should.


 I concur in the sentiment. My perception is that the new Windows 8
 architecture (forgot the name... that layered thing) downplays CLR.


 Andrei


It is called WinRT and while it downplays the CLR, by being based in 
COM, you can target it with .NET as well.




So it does not matter if Microsoft throws the CLR out of the window and
replaces it with WinRT, native code, or whatever they can think of.



So I would say it is an error to think Microsoft's is not investing into 
those languages, just because they are moving back to native.

--
Paulo



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling  parent  Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 09.09.2013 20:17, schrieb Russel Winder:

 On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 18:31 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 […]

 There are lots of options still open and as someone that is active in
 both JVM and .NET worlds, I don't see .NET slowing down in the
 enterprise space. Pretty much the contrary actually, looking at the
 requests for proposals my employer receives.


 Clearly we are in very different sectors. Everywhere I am going JVM and
 native is displacing CLR. I can quite happily believe both our
 observations are correct!
 ...


Yes, my world are the Fortune 500 companies, with multiple development 
sites, where the projects always have an off-shore component as well, 
usually with 50-100 developers on them.


the types of projects we do. Specially given the average type of skills 
the project teams have.

--
Paulo



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 01:03 +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

=20

 http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-334.htm ) a=


nd

 the common language infrastructure (CLI)  (
 http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm )
 have been standardised for some time now, so that aspect is safe from



I

 - such as the cryptography library.


Just because there are standards doesn't mean patent issues have gone
away.  Most mobile phone technology is standardized but there are some
patents that have to be licenced, supposedly on "frand" terms, but,=E2=80=
=A6
(cf. Apple vs. Motorola for a classic case of how to "game the system".)

Clearly though mobile phone technology involves hardware and hardware
implemented software things so the patents tend to be real. In the
software world patents are a nightmare, well in the USA anyway. Most
countries such as UK (but not the EU, so you can get software patents in
the UK :-( do not grant software patents. So the threats Microsoft have

except in the USA.

Of course in the USA you are not allowed to use doubly-linked lists
without paying royalties. http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US7028023
--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 10:29, Russel Winder wrote:

 It also appears that Microsoft are beginning to think the whole CLR
 thing is on it's last legs.


 in fact but also had a lot of FUD associated with it.  The "Mono hatred"
 stemmed from that. So will Microsoft go after Mono with patent suits if

 income stream, but it is unlikely to be profitable and so may be not.


I think the Mono hatred/fear stemmed from a particular time in Linux history 
which involved a combination of Novell's role as a major driver of Mono in 
GNOME, Microsoft's very aggressive patent posturing (although no actual 
lawsuits), and the close relationship between Novell and Microsoft that 
culminated in their patent agreement.

I don't think Microsoft would ever bother suing over Mono patents just for
money 
-- the concern was always that Novell's pushing of Mono was a Trojan Horse that 
would enable Microsoft to take down the wider Linux community and Novell to 
clean up on the business Linux side.


 Without solid support from Microsoft the C#F





First-mover advantage, cross-platform for longer, less patent fear ...



 a huge amount of dependencies. My problem is I do not understand how the
 "Solution" system is the same or different to everyone else's "Project"
 system. I guess I do not have much enthusiasm to find out as I can just
 use Emacs.


Yes, the number of dependencies is very, very annoying if you don't want to
work 



 GNOME vs. Qt may be religious to certain parties, but most people choose
 either GNOME or KDE for the desktop and then load the other widget set
 as well. I use GNOME but I have a many Qt-based things on here and
 indeed develop PySide and PyQt5 based systems since GNOME is a
 non-starter on Windows and OS X. Pragmatism is the order of the day here
 not religious fervour.


Yes, GNOME vs. KDE is the issue, not GTK vs Qt.  Installing a specifically
GNOME 
or KDE app will pull in a ton of dependencies from the other desktop,
installing 
a purely Qt- or GTK-based app is much less heavy (it's almost unavoidable I'd 
say to have both Qt- and GTK-based code on your system).

I found this out recently when trying to install kcachegrind, which wanted to 
pull in a ton of stuff from the KDE desktop that really didn't seem necessary. 
It does apparently include a "qcachegrind" package that's purely Qt-based, but 
it's not packaged separately for Debian or Ubuntu :-(


 I think that now that Qt has escaped from
 Microsoft^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HNokia, it will return to being one of the two
 primary system for cross-platform GUI systems, wxWidgets being the
 other. Thus I think QtD (fot Qt4 and Qt5) should be seen as an essential
 component of the D milieu.  wxD should also get some presence. It is
 great we have GtkD, but I cannot see it ever having any cross-platform
 traction.


I think that move is already happening and has been for some time -- in fact I 
think the resurgence of Qt has been happening ever since it was LGPL'd.  My 
impression is that GTK/GNOME won out historically because the Qt GPL/commercial 
dual licence meant that there were licensing compatibility issues even for free 
software, and that there was a single commercial gatekeeper for proprietary 
software.  That was an undesirable situation to have for the core graphical 
toolkit of an operating system, so GTK was preferred.

I completely agree that QtD should be a priority project -- I think Qt's 
importance is only going to grow.

Perhaps this is a nice point to re-iterate my earlier plea for consideration of 
Qt Creator as a potential cross-platform D IDE? :-)



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply "Flamaros" <flamaros.xavier gmail.com>  writes:


On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 09:31:59 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:

 On 09/09/13 10:29, Russel Winder wrote:

 It also appears that Microsoft are beginning to think the 
 whole CLR
 thing is on it's last legs.


 some basis
 in fact but also had a lot of FUD associated with it.  The 
 "Mono hatred"
 stemmed from that. So will Microsoft go after Mono with patent 
 suits if

 as an
 income stream, but it is unlikely to be profitable and so may 
 be not.


 I think the Mono hatred/fear stemmed from a particular time in 
 Linux history which involved a combination of Novell's role as 
 a major driver of Mono in GNOME, Microsoft's very aggressive 
 patent posturing (although no actual lawsuits), and the close 
 relationship between Novell and Microsoft that culminated in 
 their patent agreement.

 I don't think Microsoft would ever bother suing over Mono 
 patents just for money -- the concern was always that Novell's 
 pushing of Mono was a Trojan Horse that would enable Microsoft 
 to take down the wider Linux community and Novell to clean up 
 on the business Linux side.


 Without solid support from Microsoft the C#F
 unlikely to

 making people

 much

 not.


 First-mover advantage, cross-platform for longer, less patent 
 fear ...



 brought in
 a huge amount of dependencies. My problem is I do not 
 understand how the
 "Solution" system is the same or different to everyone else's 
 "Project"
 system. I guess I do not have much enthusiasm to find out as I 
 can just
 use Emacs.


 Yes, the number of dependencies is very, very annoying if you 



 GNOME vs. Qt may be religious to certain parties, but most 
 people choose
 either GNOME or KDE for the desktop and then load the other 
 widget set
 as well. I use GNOME but I have a many Qt-based things on here 
 and
 indeed develop PySide and PyQt5 based systems since GNOME is a
 non-starter on Windows and OS X. Pragmatism is the order of 
 the day here
 not religious fervour.


 Yes, GNOME vs. KDE is the issue, not GTK vs Qt.  Installing a 
 specifically GNOME or KDE app will pull in a ton of 
 dependencies from the other desktop, installing a purely Qt- or 
 GTK-based app is much less heavy (it's almost unavoidable I'd 
 say to have both Qt- and GTK-based code on your system).

 I found this out recently when trying to install kcachegrind, 
 which wanted to pull in a ton of stuff from the KDE desktop 
 that really didn't seem necessary. It does apparently include a 
 "qcachegrind" package that's purely Qt-based, but it's not 
 packaged separately for Debian or Ubuntu :-(


 I think that now that Qt has escaped from
 Microsoft^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HNokia, it will return to being one 
 of the two
 primary system for cross-platform GUI systems, wxWidgets being 
 the
 other. Thus I think QtD (fot Qt4 and Qt5) should be seen as an 
 essential
 component of the D milieu.  wxD should also get some presence. 
 It is
 great we have GtkD, but I cannot see it ever having any 
 cross-platform
 traction.


 I think that move is already happening and has been for some 
 time -- in fact I think the resurgence of Qt has been happening 
 ever since it was LGPL'd.  My impression is that GTK/GNOME won 
 out historically because the Qt GPL/commercial dual licence 
 meant that there were licensing compatibility issues even for 
 free software, and that there was a single commercial 
 gatekeeper for proprietary software.  That was an undesirable 
 situation to have for the core graphical toolkit of an 
 operating system, so GTK was preferred.

 I completely agree that QtD should be a priority project -- I 
 think Qt's importance is only going to grow.

 Perhaps this is a nice point to re-iterate my earlier plea for 
 consideration of Qt Creator as a potential cross-platform D 
 IDE? :-)


Personally I think that phobos contains some parts that are in Qt 
base, so a wrapper isn't a perfect solution for D. It's certainly 
the fastest way to extend the D framework and add a GUI library, 
but Qt phylosophy doesn't match perfectly with D. Just take a 
look to moc, in D it's possible and preferable to do without it.

That why we started DQuick to create a complete adaption of 
QtQuick to D, this is much hard to do but DQuick has the 
potential to be much more suitable for D.



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 21:26, Flamaros wrote:

 Personally I think that phobos contains some parts that are in Qt base, so a
 wrapper isn't a perfect solution for D. It's certainly the fastest way to
extend
 the D framework and add a GUI library, but Qt phylosophy doesn't match
perfectly
 with D. Just take a look to moc, in D it's possible and preferable to do
without
 it.

 That why we started DQuick to create a complete adaption of QtQuick to D, this
 is much hard to do but DQuick has the potential to be much more suitable for D.


I've just had a read through your DQuick announcement thread.  It looks like a 
really nice project -- I wish you a lot of success with this.

Now, that said, while Qt may have some issues with respect to D, supporting it 
isn't just a matter of wanting a GUI solution.  It's not just a graphical 
toolkit -- it's THE most important cross-platform toolkit, and has been chosen 
as a first-class SDK component by various platforms.  I'd say that makes good 
and up-to-date QtD bindings a very important strategic goal.



 Sep 09 2013



  parent  "Flamaros" <flamaros.xavier gmail.com>  writes:


On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 06:18:16 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:

 On 09/09/13 21:26, Flamaros wrote:

 Personally I think that phobos contains some parts that are in 
 Qt base, so a
 wrapper isn't a perfect solution for D. It's certainly the 
 fastest way to extend
 the D framework and add a GUI library, but Qt phylosophy 
 doesn't match perfectly
 with D. Just take a look to moc, in D it's possible and 
 preferable to do without
 it.

 That why we started DQuick to create a complete adaption of 
 QtQuick to D, this
 is much hard to do but DQuick has the potential to be much 
 more suitable for D.


 I've just had a read through your DQuick announcement thread.  
 It looks like a really nice project -- I wish you a lot of 
 success with this.

 Now, that said, while Qt may have some issues with respect to 
 D, supporting it isn't just a matter of wanting a GUI solution.
  It's not just a graphical toolkit -- it's THE most important 
 cross-platform toolkit, and has been chosen as a first-class 
 SDK component by various platforms.  I'd say that makes good 
 and up-to-date QtD bindings a very important strategic goal.


All parts of Qt that are non about GUI, like strings, io, 
network, regexp,... are or certainly will be in phobos. So for D 
applications started from ground I don't really see the benefits.
But if D is compatible with Qt/C++ existing code, it will be 
great win. In this case QtD is clearly a strategic goal.



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling  parent  Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com>  writes:


On 9 September 2013 10:31, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
<joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> wrote:

 I completely agree that QtD should be a priority project -- I think Qt's
 importance is only going to grow.

 Perhaps this is a nice point to re-iterate my earlier plea for consideration
 of Qt Creator as a potential cross-platform D IDE? :-)


Shouldn't be difficult.  ;-)

-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling  parent  "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net>  writes:


On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 18:49:05 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:

 One thing that could help with MonoD would be if it could 
 effectively support more than the most recent stable version of 
 MonoDevelop.  Version 3.0 is still the one used in many Linux 
 distros.  (4.0 is currently in the "proposed" updates for 
 Ubuntu 13.10, which means it'll probably be the default by the 
 time 13.10 is released.)

 If VisualD can support VS 2010, 2011 and 2013, it's surely 
 possible for MonoD to do something similar.

 I recognize that the developer has provided an Ubuntu PPA for 
 the latest MonoDevelop among other resources, but it's 
 preferable not to oblige users to add extra archives to their 
 distro.


Judging by the MonoD blog, that doesn't seem to be easy, because 
the MonoDevelop developers keep changing the API often.



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 20:48 +0200, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 One thing that could help with MonoD would be if it could effectively sup=


port=20

 more than the most recent stable version of MonoDevelop.  Version 3.0 is =


still=20

 the one used in many Linux distros.  (4.0 is currently in the "proposed" =


updates=20

 for Ubuntu 13.10, which means it'll probably be the default by the time 1=


3.10 is=20

 released.)


Debian Unstable has Monodevelop 4.0.5, which means it should be in
Ubuntu 14.04 by default.=20


 If VisualD can support VS 2010, 2011 and 2013, it's surely possible for M=


onoD to=20

 do something similar.
=20
 I recognize that the developer has provided an Ubuntu PPA for the latest=


=20

 MonoDevelop among other resources, but it's preferable not to oblige user=


s to=20

 add extra archives to their distro.


This is an important issue for take up. If something isn't in the main
repository of the distribution and requires lots of other things also
not in the main distribution then it may get take up from "bleeding
edge" folk but it will not get mainstream take up. The Ubuntu PPA is
useful for the Ubuntu distributions but of no use to Debian, Mint,
Fedora, RHEL, Arch, OS X. (Windows is just beyond the pale ;-)

Getting things into the main Debian, Fedora and Arch repositories seems
like the best way of maximizing take up in the Linux community. Getting
things into MacPorts and HomeBrew (the former for me), maximizes take up
in the OS X community, even if DMG files are provided.=20

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 09:58, Russel Winder wrote:

 Debian Unstable has Monodevelop 4.0.5, which means it should be in
 Ubuntu 14.04 by default.


I'm reasonably sure it'll be in Ubuntu 13.10 by default too.  I'll probably try 
it out then.


 This is an important issue for take up. If something isn't in the main
 repository of the distribution and requires lots of other things also
 not in the main distribution then it may get take up from "bleeding
 edge" folk but it will not get mainstream take up. The Ubuntu PPA is
 useful for the Ubuntu distributions but of no use to Debian, Mint,
 Fedora, RHEL, Arch, OS X. (Windows is just beyond the pale ;-)

 Getting things into the main Debian, Fedora and Arch repositories seems
 like the best way of maximizing take up in the Linux community. Getting
 things into MacPorts and HomeBrew (the former for me), maximizes take up
 in the OS X community, even if DMG files are provided.


I'd add Ubuntu also to that list, simply because of the number of users -- it's 
helpful to ensure that every 6 months, such a widely-used distro has the latest 
D tools.



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 11:11 +0200, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 I'd add Ubuntu also to that list, simply because of the number of users -=


- it's=20

 helpful to ensure that every 6 months, such a widely-used distro has the =


latest=20

 D tools.


Unless Ubuntu changes it's strategy being in Debian Unstable means you
get slurped into the next Ubuntu.

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling  parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 19:59, Russel Winder wrote:

 Unless Ubuntu changes it's strategy being in Debian Unstable means you
 get slurped into the next Ubuntu.


Yes, I know, but GDC is still fast-moving enough that the latest update might 
not make it via the Debian Unstable slurp.  Unless there's a close enough 
relationship that any updates to GCC in Debian Unstable also get pulled through 
into Ubuntu whenever they're made?



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 00:35 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the only=20
 options are InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well=20
 received by most C and C++ guys. The target audience for D.
=20
 That is my humble opinion, regarding the type of tooling I expect from
 an IDE.


Or write a D specific platform IDE?

LiteIDE for Go is really, rather good, and way better than the Go mode
for Eclipse.

Similar things happen in Python-land. Eclipse/Pydev or strip down
Aptana; ItelliJ IDEA or strip down PyCharm are fine, but Wing IDE 101
and Ninja IDEA are actually better.

Sadly, it seems that "one IDE all languages" is an inferior solution to
"one language one IDE".

And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? Surely the
target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code
executable.
--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 08 2013



 next sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 08.09.2013 13:24, schrieb Russel Winder:

 On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 00:35 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 […]

 And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? Surely the
 target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code
 executable.


Because many of us are actually aware of compilers that produce native 
code for our languages, even if they are not the default way to use them.

To make it more clear, the ML family of languages, Pascal family of
languages, even JVM and .NET environments have native compilers 
available. You just have to look for them.

Additionally anyone that could move to more productive languages already 
did.

So it only remains the C and C++ developers, that either by religion or
lack of alternatives, are stuck in their world.

The ones that are stuck by religion, will eventually disappear, given 
enough time.

So we are left with the ones that cannot move on due to lack of 
alternatives, hardware constraints or whatever the issue might be.

--
Paulo



 Sep 08 2013



  parent reply "Brian Rogoff" <brogoff gmail.com>  writes:


On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 11:48:06 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Am 08.09.2013 13:24, schrieb Russel Winder:

 On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 00:35 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 […]

 And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? 
 Surely the
 target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code
 executable.


 Because many of us are actually aware of compilers that produce 
 native code for our languages, even if they are not the default 
 way to use them.


If you're used to using an IDE, let's say IntelliJ for Java, and 
you may also want to develop in D, why shouldn't you be able to 
use that IDE, and not context switch? There may be more of a 
market for Java/Python/whatever programmers interested in D than 
you think.


 To make it more clear, the ML family of languages, Pascal 
 family of
 languages, even JVM and .NET environments have native compilers 
 available. You just have to look for them.


IMO, D has more potential as a native code compilation target 

able to control and even disable garbage collection. So, even 
users of managed languages may want to examine D.

-- Brian



 Sep 09 2013



  parent  "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 16:12:00 UTC, Brian Rogoff wrote:

 On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 11:48:06 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Am 08.09.2013 13:24, schrieb Russel Winder:

 On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 00:35 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 […]


 To make it more clear, the ML family of languages, Pascal 
 family of
 languages, even JVM and .NET environments have native 
 compilers available. You just have to look for them.


 IMO, D has more potential as a native code compilation target 

 able to control and even disable garbage collection. So, even 
 users of managed languages may want to examine D.

 -- Brian


I really hate the term managed language coined by Microsoft with
.NET's introduction.

What makes a language managed?

A GC? Then D is also managed.

Compiling to a VM? Then Java is native when I use the Excelsior 
JET compiler.

Strong typing? Then Ada is managed.

One type of consulting projects we do is port C++ code to 
.NET/JVM environments.

I can assure that given the proper expertise how to code in a GC 
friendly way, GC is no a bottleneck than having to write special 
tuned versions of malloc()/free().

In D's case it is currently an issue, given that the current 
implementation is not as advanced as what is available in other 
runtimes.

--
Paulo



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling  parent  "Flamaros" <flamaros.xavier gmail.com>  writes:


On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 11:24:32 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:

 And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? 
 Surely the
 target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code
 executable.


I think that D visibility isn't enough for the moment to be able 

that build work oriented applications certainly also wait for 
much bigger frameworks than phobos in this actual state.

The c++ developers are used to develop a lot of thing from 
scratch and use tiny libraries for specifics things.

It will certainly take years before seeing much developers coming 




 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 08/09/13 13:24, Russel Winder wrote:

 And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? Surely the
 target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code
 executable.


They're not the _only_ target audience but they're surely the _main_ target 
audience.  Users of higher-level languages have presumably made the choice that 
systems-level performance is not their priority.

That said, I think there's a clear case for D to be made to people who
currently 
have an "Other language plus C" toolchain.  I love D for the fact that it lets 
you use the high-level constructions of languages like Python but you can also 
drill down to systems level to optimize performance _without changing language_.



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Regan Heath" <regan netmail.co.nz>  writes:


On Sat, 07 Sep 2013 23:35:47 +0100, Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  
wrote:


 Am 07.09.2013 23:57, schrieb Ramon:> On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at  
 20:02:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
  >> Am 07.09.2013 21:55, schrieb Peter Alexander:
  >>> On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:39:21 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
  >>>> Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
  >>>> connection :-)
  >>>
  >>> Why sadly? It's a fantastic product.
  >>
  >> The only thing I don't like is the reliance on Visual Assist and
  >> ReSharper for refactoring features that other IDEs offer out of the  
 box.
  >>
  >> --
  >> Paulo
  >
  > I'm both pro and against it.
  >
  > Pro because VisualD seems to be (Pardon me, I don't work on Windoze  
 and
  > didn't work with it but trust Windoze D users opinion on that) an
  > excellent solution and supporting nicely what seems to be *the* IDE in
  > Windoze world.
  >
  > Against because we need a solution for *all* major platforms (Lx32,
  > Lx64, *BSD, apple, w32,w64) and I'm worried that this resolution here
  > might lead to a "So, we *do* have an IDE. Case closed" attitude.
  >
  > Kudos anyway to Rainer though for his important work.
  >
  > A+ -R

 Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the only  
 options are InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well  
 received by most C and C++ guys. The target audience for D.


Eclipse is dreadful.  I hate it with a passion.


 That is my humble opinion, regarding the type of tooling I expect from
 an IDE.


My solution: Do all development on windows, commit, update on build  
machine, rinse and repeat ...  that said, I haven't had to do fully cross  
platform work for at least 7 years.

R

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 09/09/2013 10:25, Regan Heath wrote:

 Eclipse is dreadful.  I hate it with a passion.


Any feedback why? Bloat, sluggishness? I do hope it's not just because 
the way it used to handle refreshing of resources...

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 16 2013



  parent  "Regan Heath" <regan netmail.co.nz>  writes:


On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:24:42 +0100, Bruno Medeiros  
<brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com> wrote:


 On 09/09/2013 10:25, Regan Heath wrote:

 Eclipse is dreadful.  I hate it with a passion.


 Any feedback why? Bloat, sluggishness? I do hope it's not just because  
 the way it used to handle refreshing of resources...


The smallest part of it is simply getting used to different hotkeys, and  
swapping back and forth between it and MSVC with a different set of  
hotkeys.  I realise this "problem" goes away with time, however as long as  
I have to use both, it remains an issue to some degree.

Sluggishness is an issue.

Yes, refreshing was/is a major problem .. and we're stuck on an old  
version for one of our products - due to other library dependencies.  Some  
of these comments may be related to that old version, i.e. the refresh  
problem

When you search for text in files, if the file hasn't been 'refreshed' it  
gives an error/warning, instead of just refreshing it - who thought that  
was a good idea!

Builds often fail, until you refresh, cleanup, refresh, cleanup often  
multiple times.

Build path settings seem to go missing all by themselves.

There are probably more refresh related issues but I can't recall them  
ATM.  TBH I avoid using it as much as I can, and I do less work in Java  
than C/C++ and for the latter prefer MSVC.

R

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/



 Sep 17 2013



prev sibling  parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 07/09/2013 23:35, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the only
 options are InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well
 received by most C and C++ guys. The target audience for D.


Just because Eclipse is not well received by the C and C++ community 
(apparently - even that can be debated), that doesn't mean that is a 
reasonable appraisal of Eclipse. It might just be an outdated opinion.

I understand Eclipse bashing by the Vi/Emacs/text-editor people, that is 
an ongoing, but familiar and understood debate that has occured many 
times before, and is not going away anytime soon I think. (and is really 
not about Eclipse itself, but text editors vs. heavyweight IDEs, etc.)

But Eclipse bashing by people who use say, VisualStudio, that I don't 
understand. Last time I tried both toolchains, VS seemed as heavy and 
"bloated" as Eclipse (CDT) was. Yet CDT seemed quite ahead in terms of 
features, especially semantics-wise (open definition, code complete, 
etc.). Admittedly this was 3-4 years ago, and I only toyed lightly with 
C/C++ code, I didn't do any serious development. But I doubt the 
situation changed such that VS got much better than CDT, if anything, 
the opposite is more likely.


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 16 2013



 next sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 16.09.2013 16:22, schrieb Bruno Medeiros:

 On 07/09/2013 23:35, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the only
 options are InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well
 received by most C and C++ guys. The target audience for D.


 Just because Eclipse is not well received by the C and C++ community
 (apparently - even that can be debated), that doesn't mean that is a
 reasonable appraisal of Eclipse. It might just be an outdated opinion.

 I understand Eclipse bashing by the Vi/Emacs/text-editor people, that is
 an ongoing, but familiar and understood debate that has occured many
 times before, and is not going away anytime soon I think. (and is really
 not about Eclipse itself, but text editors vs. heavyweight IDEs, etc.)

 But Eclipse bashing by people who use say, VisualStudio, that I don't
 understand. Last time I tried both toolchains, VS seemed as heavy and
 "bloated" as Eclipse (CDT) was. Yet CDT seemed quite ahead in terms of
 features, especially semantics-wise (open definition, code complete,
 etc.). Admittedly this was 3-4 years ago, and I only toyed lightly with
 C/C++ code, I didn't do any serious development. But I doubt the
 situation changed such that VS got much better than CDT, if anything,
 the opposite is more likely.


And bashing from people that use InteliJ, Netbeans and Eclipse, 
depending on the customer?

 From these three, Eclipse is the one that always gives me more 
headaches in terms of responsiveness, the workspace concept, build tools 
that don't make to external build tools, loosing metadata just because 
and unstable plugins.

--
Paulo



 Sep 16 2013



  parent  Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 16/09/2013 16:33, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 And bashing from people that use InteliJ, Netbeans and Eclipse,
 depending on the customer?

  From these three, Eclipse is the one that always gives me more
 headaches in terms of responsiveness, the workspace concept, build tools
 that don't make to external build tools, loosing metadata just because
 and unstable plugins.

 --
 Paulo


That's another discussion altogether, usually about Eclipse's Java and 
Web development tools.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 17 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Arjan <arjan ask.me>  writes:


On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:22:29 +0200, Bruno Medeiros  
<brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com> wrote:


 But Eclipse bashing by people who use say, VisualStudio, that I don't  
 understand. Last time I tried both toolchains, VS seemed as heavy and  
 "bloated" as Eclipse (CDT) was. Yet CDT seemed quite ahead in terms of  
 features, especially semantics-wise (open definition, code complete,  
 etc.). Admittedly this was 3-4 years ago, and I only toyed lightly with  
 C/C++ code, I didn't do any serious development. But I doubt the  
 situation changed such that VS got much better than CDT, if anything,  
 the opposite is more likely.


Well I did/do use Eclipse+CDT heavy with C++ development as well for  
python development. Eclipse+CDT has improved A LOT over the last years.  
Besides it has very valuable plugins for example linuxtools and for  
embedded linux development www.yoctoproject.org.
For vim users there are plenty plugins/options available to use vim as  
editor in eclispe.
I also don't really understand the bashing. But IMO VS for development  
on-and-for windows is still ahead of eclipse.



 Sep 16 2013



prev sibling  parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>  writes:


On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:22:29 +0100
Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com> wrote:

 
 But Eclipse bashing by people who use say, VisualStudio, that I don't 
 understand. Last time I tried both toolchains, VS seemed as heavy and 
 "bloated" as Eclipse (CDT) was. Yet CDT seemed quite ahead in terms
 of features, especially semantics-wise (open definition, code
 complete, etc.). Admittedly this was 3-4 years ago, and I only toyed
 lightly with C/C++ code, I didn't do any serious development. But I
 doubt the situation changed such that VS got much better than CDT, if
 anything, the opposite is more likely.
 


Unless things have changed since I last tried, Eclipse is very
Java-centric (or JVM-centric) at a fairly fundamental level. Support
for other languages (from what I've tried) tends to get crammed into a
Java-oriented model, which can make things confusing and leave a bad
impression.



 Sep 18 2013



  parent  Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 18/09/2013 20:53, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Unless things have changed since I last tried, Eclipse is very
 Java-centric (or JVM-centric) at a fairly fundamental level. Support
 for other languages (from what I've tried) tends to get crammed into a
 Java-oriented model, which can make things confusing and leave a bad
 impression.


That's true, there is a lot of Java/JDT likeness in other Eclipse IDEs. 
I don't see why that would be a problem though, unless there is really 
very little customization in the IDE, and things are too much 
Java-centric. But some Java/JDT concepts apply well to other 
IDEs/languages too, I believe. For example the concept of projects with 
source folders, etc., applies well to D.

Do you remember any specific example you thought confusion or bad? And 
which language/IDE was it applying to?

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 19 2013



prev sibling  parent  Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com>  writes:


On 7 September 2013 22:57, Ramon <spam thanks.no> wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 20:02:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Am 07.09.2013 21:55, schrieb Peter Alexander:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:39:21 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:

 Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
 connection :-)



 Why sadly? It's a fantastic product.



 The only thing I don't like is the reliance on Visual Assist and ReSharper
 for refactoring features that other IDEs offer out of the box.

 --
 Paulo



 I'm both pro and against it.

 Pro because VisualD seems to be (Pardon me, I don't work on Windoze and
 didn't work with it but trust Windoze D users opinion on that) an excellent
 solution and supporting nicely what seems to be *the* IDE in Windoze world.


Love it or hate it, we call it Windows here.



 Against because we need a solution for *all* major platforms (Lx32, Lx64,
 *BSD, apple, w32,w64) and I'm worried that this resolution here might lead
 to a "So, we *do* have an IDE. Case closed" attitude.


Why not cross-platform instead of *just* the major platforms? :o)

-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling  parent  Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Sat, 2013-09-07 at 21:55 +0200, Peter Alexander wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:39:21 UTC, Russel Winder=20
 wrote:

 Sadly, Visual Studio is a huge player in the game. Make the
 connection :-)


=20
 Why sadly? It's a fantastic product.


Because it is Windows only and I have no capability of running Windows.=20

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 07 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  "Flamaros" <flamaros.xavier gmail.com>  writes:


On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a 
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage 
 into Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in 
 agreement on this.

 What do you think?


It would be great.



 Sep 07 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 07/09/13 21:04, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical piece
 of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on this.

 What do you think?


Yes, absolutely.  Visual Studio is one of the most important software 
development tools out there and having a seamless D experience with it will be
a 
great asset.  VisualD should definitely be given this kind of endorsement and
focus.



 Sep 07 2013



  parent reply "Paul Jurczak" <pauljurczak yahoo.com>  writes:


On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 22:38:44 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:

 On 07/09/13 21:04, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is 
 a critical piece
 of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into 
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in 
 agreement on this.

 What do you think?


 Yes, absolutely.  Visual Studio is one of the most important 
 software development tools out there and having a seamless D 
 experience with it will be a great asset.  VisualD should 
 definitely be given this kind of endorsement and focus.


Right on target. If D wants to achieve some level of visibility 
for Windows C++ developers, Visual Studio presence is crucial. We 
are talking about a huge chunk of market share here!

Disclosure: I have to use Visual Studio in work for my clients.



 Sep 07 2013



  parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 08/09/13 06:26, Paul Jurczak wrote:

 Right on target. If D wants to achieve some level of visibility for Windows C++
 developers, Visual Studio presence is crucial. We are talking about a huge
chunk
 of market share here!

 Disclosure: I have to use Visual Studio in work for my clients.


I don't. :-)  I used Visual Studio for a couple of years, about 10 years ago -- 
these days I work with vim and the Linux command line.  But there's no sense in 
not recognizing the importance of Visual Studio as a software development tool.



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Lionello Lunesu <lionello lunesu.remove.com>  writes:


On 9/8/13 3:04, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical
 piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft
 Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


Oh, yes!

Not only is VisualD the best D IDE [on Windows], but it has crucial 
pieces of software in it. Check out its C++ to D conversion tools!

L.



 Sep 07 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com>  writes:


On Saturday, September 07, 2013 12:04:51 Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical
 piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft
 Visual Studio.)
 
 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on this.
 
 What do you think?


I have no problem with it, though since I'm not likely to ever use it or 
contribute to it, I'm not sure that I particularly care one way or the other. 
I have no problem with people using IDEs and they can be nice, but I'm always 
a bit stumped by how important many people think they are and how they don't 
seem to think that they can function without them.

But if we think that moving VisualD into github/d-programming-language will 
help D, then it seems like a sensible enough move.

- Jonathan M Davis



 Sep 07 2013



  parent  "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com>  writes:


On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 01:53:02 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:

 I have no problem with it, though since I'm not likely to ever 
 use it or
 contribute to it, I'm not sure that I particularly care one way 
 or the other.
 I have no problem with people using IDEs and they can be nice, 
 but I'm always
 a bit stumped by how important many people think they are and 
 how they don't
 seem to think that they can function without them.


People can function without them, they just choose not to :-)

Put it this way: when I code in D, I regularly have to look up 
documentation to find out what functions are available and what 
arguments a function has. I don't think I've ever done that in 


And don't get me started on the debugging experience.



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  "w0rp" <devw0rp gmail.com>  writes:


On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a 
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage 
 into Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in 
 agreement on this.

 What do you think?


This is a great idea!

On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:26:11 UTC, Peter Alexander 
wrote:

 Then it should be here: http://dlang.org/download.html

 That's the most important change that needs to be made.


This too.

Having VisualD listed in the github project and on the dlang.org 
website is a great step forward. I think it moves from having an 
IDE as "some thing you can use, that some guy made for the 
language," to being an "officially endorsed IDE for the language."



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com>  writes:


On 8 September 2013 05:04, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:


 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical
 piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft
 Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


How about the bugs?
When I made the suggestion, other the obvious endorsement for the project,
I imagined the most significant outcome would be making Visual-D's bug's
first-class bugs as well.
Giving good visibility of IDE bugs to all contributors gives the whole
community a good sense of the health of this aspect of the ecosystem, even
of they don't contribute to the IDE integration themselves...



 Sep 08 2013



  parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org>  writes:


On 9/8/13 9:32 PM, Manu wrote:

 On 8 September 2013 05:04, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com
 <mailto:newshound2 digitalmars.com>> wrote:

     Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
     critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
     Microsoft Visual Studio.)

     Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement
     on this.

     What do you think?


 How about the bugs?
 When I made the suggestion, other the obvious endorsement for the
 project, I imagined the most significant outcome would be making
 Visual-D's bug's first-class bugs as well.
 Giving good visibility of IDE bugs to all contributors gives the whole
 community a good sense of the health of this aspect of the ecosystem,
 even of they don't contribute to the IDE integration themselves...


I think we should use the D mainline bug flow for VisualD, effectively 
vaulting VisualD into a first-class component of the D language.

This opens the door to other projects as well - e.g. emacs and vim 
integration helpers.


Andrei



 Sep 08 2013



 next sibling parent  Manu <turkeyman gmail.com>  writes:


On 9 September 2013 15:05, Andrei Alexandrescu <
SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:


 On 9/8/13 9:32 PM, Manu wrote:


 On 8 September 2013 05:04, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com
 <mailto:newshound2 **digitalmars.com <newshound2 digitalmars.com>>>
 wrote:

     Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
     critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
     Microsoft Visual Studio.)

     Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement
     on this.

     What do you think?


 How about the bugs?
 When I made the suggestion, other the obvious endorsement for the
 project, I imagined the most significant outcome would be making
 Visual-D's bug's first-class bugs as well.
 Giving good visibility of IDE bugs to all contributors gives the whole
 community a good sense of the health of this aspect of the ecosystem,
 even of they don't contribute to the IDE integration themselves...


 I think we should use the D mainline bug flow for VisualD, effectively
 vaulting VisualD into a first-class component of the D language.

 This opens the door to other projects as well - e.g. emacs and vim
 integration helpers.



Perfect! I'm super happy you agree with me for once! :)



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 22:05 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 This opens the door to other projects as well - e.g. emacs and vim=20
 integration helpers.


The Emacs mode stuff for D really needs to be in its own Git repository
I believe.  MELPA automatically pulls the current repository to create
the Emacs packages for people to install via the Emacs packaging system.

Also the more stuff is in the main repository the less and less
distributed the development of the various bits can be as only the
gatekeepers can commit to the mainline.

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org>  writes:


On 9/9/13 12:51 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 22:05 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 […]

 This opens the door to other projects as well - e.g. emacs and vim
 integration helpers.


 The Emacs mode stuff for D really needs to be in its own Git repository
 I believe.  MELPA automatically pulls the current repository to create
 the Emacs packages for people to install via the Emacs packaging system.

 Also the more stuff is in the main repository the less and less
 distributed the development of the various bits can be as only the
 gatekeepers can commit to the mainline.


I see no problem with making it a repo under the D-programming-language org.

Andrei



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 01:43 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 I see no problem with making it a repo under the D-programming-language o=


rg.

As long as 1 of the 21 members of the organization will take on the
responsibility for it then fine, go with it. Then we can delete the
Emacs-D-Mode-Maintainers group.

We'll need to update the MELPA entry so the pulls come from the new
repository.

We'll also have to amend Launchpad stuff as well.=20

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



 next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 9/9/2013 2:13 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 01:43 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 […]

 I see no problem with making it a repo under the D-programming-language org.




If someone can point me to how to make it so, I'll take care of it.



 As long as 1 of the 21 members of the organization will take on the
 responsibility for it then fine, go with it. Then we can delete the
 Emacs-D-Mode-Maintainers group.


Even better, I can create a TeamEmacs group that will have pull power for the 
Emacs repository, and they can be the people who have it for the previous group.



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 06:57 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 If someone can point me to how to make it so, I'll take care of it.


I will check, but I think ownership change is a push operation rather
than a pull operation. Andrei has write powers in both organizations and
so is the person who can action the ownership transfer. At that point
the other members of the current organization will lose write permission
and will have to resort to pull requests themselves.

It is really that someone with write permission has to ensure pull
requests get actioned in reasonable time with reasonable evidence. Sadly
this generally involves running the updates themselves as E-Lisp has
very poor testing facilities so TDD is not really an option :-(


 As long as 1 of the 21 members of the organization will take on the
 responsibility for it then fine, go with it. Then we can delete the
 Emacs-D-Mode-Maintainers group.


=20
 Even better, I can create a TeamEmacs group that will have pull power for=


 the=20

 Emacs repository, and they can be the people who have it for the previous=


 group.

We already have an organization Emacs-D-Mode-Maintainers is that what
you need?

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



  parent  Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org>  writes:


On 9/9/13 10:38 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 06:57 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
 […]

 If someone can point me to how to make it so, I'll take care of it.


 I will check, but I think ownership change is a push operation rather
 than a pull operation. Andrei has write powers in both organizations and
 so is the person who can action the ownership transfer. At that point
 the other members of the current organization will lose write permission
 and will have to resort to pull requests themselves.

 It is really that someone with write permission has to ensure pull
 requests get actioned in reasonable time with reasonable evidence. Sadly
 this generally involves running the updates themselves as E-Lisp has
 very poor testing facilities so TDD is not really an option :-(


I'd be glad to but I need a fair amount of handholding as I hadn't even 
heard of most acronyms you mentioned. Probably more effective would be 
to give you write access appropriately - all that's needed really is 
responsibility, which I assume you muster :o).

Andrei



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling  parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org>  writes:


On 9/9/13 2:13 AM, Russel Winder wrote:

 On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 01:43 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 […]

 I see no problem with making it a repo under the D-programming-language org.


 As long as 1 of the 21 members of the organization will take on the
 responsibility for it then fine, go with it. Then we can delete the
 Emacs-D-Mode-Maintainers group.

 We'll need to update the MELPA entry so the pulls come from the new
 repository.

 We'll also have to amend Launchpad stuff as well.


OK, so what's the next step? To whom should we talk? Could you carry the 
message?

Andrei



 Sep 09 2013



 next sibling parent  Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 09:34 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/9/13 2:13 AM, Russel Winder wrote:


[=E2=80=A6]

 We'll need to update the MELPA entry so the pulls come from the new
 repository.




I'll have to check this. I didn't set it up, it all seemed to happen by
magic, i.e. someone with MELPA control powers just started pulling and
packaging our repository. Which was good.


 We'll also have to amend Launchpad stuff as well.


=20
 OK, so what's the next step? To whom should we talk? Could you carry the=


=20

 message?


I can handle all the Launchpad and Bazaar end of things as we leave that
infrastructure exactly as it is now. It is only there really as
terminating Launchpad projects seems to need personal authority from
Mark Shuttleworth.

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling  parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 19:41, Russel Winder wrote:

 I can handle all the Launchpad and Bazaar end of things as we leave that
 infrastructure exactly as it is now. It is only there really as
 terminating Launchpad projects seems to need personal authority from
 Mark Shuttleworth.


Really?!!  Seems a bit extreme.

I suppose though there is a benefit in making it impossible for a project 
maintainer to unilaterally declare an end to the project and take down its
pages 
(cf. the whole openMosix mess).



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 09:51, Russel Winder wrote:

 The Emacs mode stuff for D really needs to be in its own Git repository
 I believe.  MELPA automatically pulls the current repository to create
 the Emacs packages for people to install via the Emacs packaging system.


If it's Emacs stuff, shouldn't it be versioned in bzr? :-)


 Also the more stuff is in the main repository the less and less
 distributed the development of the various bits can be as only the
 gatekeepers can commit to the mainline.


I don't see that necessarily needs to be so.  Different projects should be able 
to have different gatekeepers/maintainers.  If that's problematic, if GitHub 
won't support separate maintainer groups for different repositories of 
D-Programming-Language, there are probably other ways round it -- e.g. the 
maintainers could have a separate project branch, and the
D-Programming-Language 
repo could auto-pull from it (and never be pushed to directly).

Also, so long as everyone is trustworthy and limits their activity to their 
sphere of responsibility, there's no reason why you shouldn't just have a large 
maintainer group.  If you can't trust maintainer-of-project-X to only use admin 
powers for project X, and not for project Y as well, then why is he/she 
maintainer of project X in the first place?



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 9/8/2013 10:05 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 I think we should use the D mainline bug flow for VisualD, effectively vaulting
 VisualD into a first-class component of the D language.

 This opens the door to other projects as well - e.g. emacs and vim integration
 helpers.


VisualD is now a component on Bugzilla, so Manu can start reporting bugs there!



 Sep 09 2013



 next sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com>  writes:


On 9 September 2013 23:53, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:


 On 9/8/2013 10:05 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 I think we should use the D mainline bug flow for VisualD, effectively
 vaulting
 VisualD into a first-class component of the D language.

 This opens the door to other projects as well - e.g. emacs and vim
 integration
 helpers.


 VisualD is now a component on Bugzilla, so Manu can start reporting bugs
 there!


Did you migrate the existing bug list?
It's already fairly extensive... let's get those out of the way first ;)



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 9/9/2013 7:47 AM, Manu wrote:

 Did you migrate the existing bug list?


No. I just added the component.



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com>  writes:


On 2013-09-09 17:16, Walter Bright wrote:


 No. I just added the component.


Do we have an API for the D bugzilla so we can easily migrate the issues?

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg



 Sep 10 2013



  parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 9/10/2013 12:44 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-09-09 17:16, Walter Bright wrote:


 No. I just added the component.


 Do we have an API for the D bugzilla so we can easily migrate the issues?


Rainer is working on it, as he writes elsewhere in this thread.



 Sep 10 2013



  parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com>  writes:


On 2013-09-10 09:45, Walter Bright wrote:


 Rainer is working on it, as he writes elsewhere in this thread.


Rainer was asking if anyone have experience with migrating Trac issues 
to bugzilla. Bugzilla does have an API. The question is it enabled for 
the D bugzilla.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg



 Sep 10 2013



  parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 9/10/2013 1:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 Rainer was asking if anyone have experience with migrating Trac issues to
 bugzilla. Bugzilla does have an API. The question is it enabled for the D
bugzilla.


I don't know. Brad Roberts runs Bugzilla. I'll forward this to him.



 Sep 10 2013



  parent  Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com>  writes:


On 9/10/13 2:46 AM, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 9/10/2013 1:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 Rainer was asking if anyone have experience with migrating Trac issues to
 bugzilla. Bugzilla does have an API. The question is it enabled for the D
bugzilla.


 I don't know. Brad Roberts runs Bugzilla. I'll forward this to him.


I believe so.. it's part of the standard install.  The only issue might be that
the version we're 
running is significantly out of date.



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling  parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com>  writes:


On 9 September 2013 23:53, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:


 On 9/8/2013 10:05 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 I think we should use the D mainline bug flow for VisualD, effectively
 vaulting
 VisualD into a first-class component of the D language.

 This opens the door to other projects as well - e.g. emacs and vim
 integration
 helpers.


 VisualD is now a component on Bugzilla, so Manu can start reporting bugs
 there!


Another thought... what do you reckon about including Visual-D as an
optional component in the windows DMD installer?
One-click install that includes an environment for windows users would
probably kick-start a lot of users.
It can also simplify the Visual-D installation, which expects you to have
pre-installed DMD, and prompts for the path to the exe. Since this is known
during the DMD installer, it removes a few steps from the install process.



 Sep 09 2013



 next sibling parent  Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 9/9/2013 7:55 AM, Manu wrote:

 Another thought... what do you reckon about including Visual-D as an optional
 component in the windows DMD installer?
 One-click install that includes an environment for windows users would probably
 kick-start a lot of users.
 It can also simplify the Visual-D installation, which expects you to have
 pre-installed DMD, and prompts for the path to the exe. Since this is known
 during the DMD installer, it removes a few steps from the install process.


Yes, we can start working towards that.



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling  parent reply "Paul Jurczak" <pauljurczak yahoo.com>  writes:


On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 14:55:34 UTC, Manu wrote:
[...]

 Another thought... what do you reckon about including Visual-D 
 as an
 optional component in the windows DMD installer?
 One-click install that includes an environment for windows 
 users would
 probably kick-start a lot of users.
 It can also simplify the Visual-D installation, which expects 
 you to have
 pre-installed DMD, and prompts for the path to the exe. Since 
 this is known
 during the DMD installer, it removes a few steps from the 
 install process.


Great idea!



 Sep 09 2013



  parent  "Ramon" <spam thanks.no>  writes:


Compliments to Russel Winder for simply discussing the matter and 
staying professional at all times rather than to play group and 
social games.

Special thanks to Walter Bright for at least indirectly admitting 
that he didn't care for what I said simply because he judged me 
to be a troll right away.

As it is senseless anyway for me to discuss here, no matter how 
polite or well intended, I will accept the unwritten local rules 
and stay away from this forum and limit myself to the D.learn 
forum and some others for those cases where I have to contribute 
some bits.
Thanks in that context also to dicebot who hinted me early on 
that one needs to stay low here for quite some time until one has 
earned by merits, usually in the form of code, to have an opinion 
without being considered a troll.

And generally thanks to all here; I have learned more about D 
here than I had expected.

Thanks -R



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 11:38 +0200, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 If it's Emacs stuff, shouldn't it be versioned in bzr? :-)


It used to be, but a decision was made that it should be in the VCS of D
rather than the VCS of Emacs. Given MELPA copes with Git and Bazaar,
this turned into a free-choice.

[=E2=80=A6]

 I don't see that necessarily needs to be so.  Different projects should b=


e able=20

 to have different gatekeepers/maintainers.  If that's problematic, if Git=


Hub=20

 won't support separate maintainer groups for different repositories of=


=20

 D-Programming-Language, there are probably other ways round it -- e.g. th=


e=20

 maintainers could have a separate project branch, and the D-Programming-L=


anguage=20

 repo could auto-pull from it (and never be pushed to directly).


As far as I am aware there is no concept of distinct and separately
managed "sub-organization". So if a repository is owned by an
organization only members of that organization have write permission. Or
can the write permissions be managed per repository so that additional
individual write members are allowed per repository. If the latter is
possible it solves all the problems I am concerned over.

I think we need to keep the repositories simple with branches only for
feature work and maintenance work. Having branches for internal
management would just indicate an inability of GitHub to handle the
workflow.


 Also, so long as everyone is trustworthy and limits their activity to the=


ir=20

 sphere of responsibility, there's no reason why you shouldn't just have a=


 large=20

 maintainer group.  If you can't trust maintainer-of-project-X to only use=


 admin=20

 powers for project X, and not for project Y as well, then why is he/she=


=20

 maintainer of project X in the first place?


There is that :-)

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 19:29, Russel Winder wrote:

 On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 11:38 +0200, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
 […]

 If it's Emacs stuff, shouldn't it be versioned in bzr? :-)


 It used to be, but a decision was made that it should be in the VCS of D
 rather than the VCS of Emacs. Given MELPA copes with Git and Bazaar,
 this turned into a free-choice.


Actually this was just a shout-out to a few years back when we were both fairly 
active members of the bzr mailing list :-)  I do still follow it, but I think 
sadly you are now one of the few remaining active list members ... ?



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>  writes:


On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 19:37 +0200, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]

 Actually this was just a shout-out to a few years back when we were both =


fairly=20

 active members of the bzr mailing list :-)  I do still follow it, but I t=


hink=20

 sadly you are now one of the few remaining active list members ... ?


:-)

and=20

:-(

Bazaar (and Mercurial) were the only usable DVCSs early on, but already
by 2006, O'Reilly had decided that Git was the winner and everything
else was history =E2=80=93 they effectively created a self-fulfilling proph=
ecy.
Git has over the years been bullied into being almost usable, Bazaar has
lost it's major supporter and Mercurial drifts on the edge of being
mainstream relevant. The USP of Git for me is remote tracking branches.
I forgive a lot of unusability in Git for that.

The interesting player in the game that is still around and really good,
but very few have heard of is Fossil.

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 09.09.2013 19:47, schrieb Russel Winder:

 On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 19:37 +0200, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
 […]

 Actually this was just a shout-out to a few years back when we were both fairly
 active members of the bzr mailing list :-)  I do still follow it, but I think
 sadly you are now one of the few remaining active list members ... ?


 :-)

 and

 :-(

 Bazaar (and Mercurial) were the only usable DVCSs early on, but already
 by 2006, O'Reilly had decided that Git was the winner and everything
 else was history – they effectively created a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 Git has over the years been bullied into being almost usable, Bazaar has
 lost it's major supporter and Mercurial drifts on the edge of being
 mainstream relevant. The USP of Git for me is remote tracking branches.
 I forgive a lot of unusability in Git for that.

 The interesting player in the game that is still around and really good,
 but very few have heard of is Fossil.


On Windows world, Mercurial still has the edge over Git, given the poor 
Windows support.

This will eventually change given the recent endorsement Microsoft has 
given to Git on their tooling, but it will still take some time to change.

--
Paulo



 Sep 09 2013



  parent reply "Kapps" <opantm2+spam gmail.com>  writes:


On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 18:03:20 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote

 On Windows world, Mercurial still has the edge over Git, given 
 the poor Windows support.

 This will eventually change given the recent endorsement 
 Microsoft has given to Git on their tooling, but it will still 
 take some time to change.

 --
 Paulo


I find Git on Windows to be very nice actually. I just download 
GitExtensions, which installs Git and KDiff and such, as well as 
an awesome extension for Visual Studio. That extension is the 
best version control IDE integration I've ever used. Git 
Extensions will also set git up for command prompt, and 
optionally include tools like ssh-keygen so you can use the 
command line as you would on Linux. Perhaps there was a time that 
Windows support for Git was terrible, but I find it excellent now.



 Sep 09 2013



  parent  Peter Williams <pwil3058 bigpond.net.au>  writes:


On 10/09/13 04:32, Kapps wrote:

 On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 18:03:20 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote

 On Windows world, Mercurial still has the edge over Git, given the
 poor Windows support.

 This will eventually change given the recent endorsement Microsoft has
 given to Git on their tooling, but it will still take some time to
 change.

 --
 Paulo


 I find Git on Windows to be very nice actually. I just download
 GitExtensions, which installs Git and KDiff and such, as well as an
 awesome extension for Visual Studio. That extension is the best version
 control IDE integration I've ever used. Git Extensions will also set git
 up for command prompt, and optionally include tools like ssh-keygen so
 you can use the command line as you would on Linux. Perhaps there was a
 time that Windows support for Git was terrible, but I find it excellent
 now.


For those who prefer Mercurial to Git (I used to be one but I've since 
gone with the tide) there is a Mercurial extension 
<http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/HgGit> which enables you to clone a 
git repository with Mercurial and then do pushes, pulls etc with that 
repository as if it were a Mercurial one.  This means that you can use 
github without having to learn git.

Peter



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling  parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 09/09/13 19:47, Russel Winder wrote:

 Bazaar (and Mercurial) were the only usable DVCSs early on, but already
 by 2006, O'Reilly had decided that Git was the winner and everything
 else was history – they effectively created a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 Git has over the years been bullied into being almost usable, Bazaar has
 lost it's major supporter and Mercurial drifts on the edge of being
 mainstream relevant. The USP of Git for me is remote tracking branches.
 I forgive a lot of unusability in Git for that.


I have personally drifted quite strongly towards git over the last 4 years.  I 
agree the UI of bzr is still friendlier, but I have come to appreciate many of 
the features of git and these days the extra complexity is not that much 
greater.  That said, partly it's simply a consequence of the projects I'm 
involved with these days.

Whatever my personal software choices, I'm very sad that bzr is no longer
really 
in the game.  It was an excellent tool, the first VCS I really used, and a
great 
way to learn the principles of DVCS.


 The interesting player in the game that is still around and really good,
 but very few have heard of is Fossil.


I have heard of it, but never tried it.  I really must give it a look, though
-- 
its choice to include bug tracking, wiki pages, etc. within the versioned 
history was something I found both intriguing and very attractive.

How does it fare on the speed/scale front?



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx>  writes:


On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 02:32:40PM +1000, Manu wrote:

 On 8 September 2013 05:04, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:
 

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement
 on this.

 What do you think?


 
 How about the bugs?
 When I made the suggestion, other the obvious endorsement for the
 project, I imagined the most significant outcome would be making
 Visual-D's bug's first-class bugs as well.
 Giving good visibility of IDE bugs to all contributors gives the whole
 community a good sense of the health of this aspect of the ecosystem,
 even of they don't contribute to the IDE integration themselves...


Good point. Should we integrate the bugs into the current D bugtracker
as well? It would seem counterproductive to have the repo under the
"official" dlang github organization yet have two separate bug trackers.


T

-- 
There is no gravity. The earth sucks.



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Manu <turkeyman gmail.com>  writes:


On 9 September 2013 14:32, Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:


 On 8 September 2013 05:04, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>wrote:


 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical
 piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft
 Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


 How about the bugs?
 When I made the suggestion, other the obvious endorsement for the project,
 I imagined the most significant outcome would be making Visual-D's bug's
 first-class bugs as well.
 Giving good visibility of IDE bugs to all contributors gives the whole
 community a good sense of the health of this aspect of the ecosystem, even
 of they don't contribute to the IDE integration themselves...



_< .. auto-complete on phones!





 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Volcz" <volcz kth.se>  writes:


Good idea!

What about other useful projects? I know that a official lexer 
was discussed some time ago. What about DCD? Should ex VisualD 
use software like DCD if both are on the dlang GitHub?

Should we make "pull requests"/empty repos. for other nice to 
have software?



 Sep 08 2013



 next sibling parent  Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com>  writes:


On Monday, September 09, 2013 07:41:44 Volcz wrote:

 Good idea!
 
 What about other useful projects? I know that a official lexer
 was discussed some time ago. What about DCD? Should ex VisualD
 use software like DCD if both are on the dlang GitHub?


The plan is to integrate a full lexer and parser into Phobos (and hopefully 
eventually have dmd use those sometime after the front-end has been converted 
to D). So, I wouldn't expect there to be any separate projects for those to be 
moved into github/d-programming-language.

I also don't think that we should rush and try and shove a bunch of projects 
in the official D github org. If it makes sense to put something there, then we 
should put something there, but IMHO it needs to actually have a good reason 
to be official, not just because it's useful.

- Jonathan M Davis



 Sep 08 2013



prev sibling  parent  Peter Williams <pwil3058 bigpond.net.au>  writes:


On 09/09/13 15:55, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Monday, September 09, 2013 07:41:44 Volcz wrote:

 Good idea!

 What about other useful projects? I know that a official lexer
 was discussed some time ago. What about DCD? Should ex VisualD
 use software like DCD if both are on the dlang GitHub?


 The plan is to integrate a full lexer and parser into Phobos (and hopefully
 eventually have dmd use those sometime after the front-end has been converted
 to D). So, I wouldn't expect there to be any separate projects for those to be
 moved into github/d-programming-language.

 I also don't think that we should rush and try and shove a bunch of projects
 in the official D github org. If it makes sense to put something there, then we
 should put something there, but IMHO it needs to actually have a good reason
 to be official, not just because it's useful.

 - Jonathan M Davis


I'll take this opportunity to remind people of dunnart (on github under 
user name pwil3058) which is an enhanced LALR(1) parser generator for D. 
  Lexical analysis specification is a part of the overall grammar 
specification (using std.regex type regular expressions).  The lexical 
analysis part of this code can also be used separately if desired (but 
only on strings and not on streams i.e. read the whole file into a 
string and give it to the lexer rather than giving the lexer the file 
and letting it pull characters in one at a time).

Unfortunately, like most software, the documentation is still a bit less 
than ideal/complete but I'll gladly answer questions if anyone wants to 
use it.

Peter



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com>  writes:


On 2013-09-07 21:04, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical
 piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft
 Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


I don't think it matters that much which git repository it uses. It's 
more important, as others have suggested, to promote it, put it on 
dlang.org/downloads, integrate with bugzilla and so on.

Note, I'm not against it.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg



 Sep 09 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de>  writes:


On 07.09.2013 21:04, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical
 piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft
 Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?



Thanks everyone for supporting this move. I have just transferred the 
repository to the D-Programming-Language organization and it can now be 
found at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/visuald

I'm planning to move the issues from the dsource bug database to 
bugzilla. Does anyone have experience with converting trac issues to 
bugzilla? There are currently 60 open reports (half of them enhancement 
requests), so it should also be possible to do this manually.

The documentation and downloads are also going to move to dlang.org, but 
until this is sorted out, I'll leave it at dsource.org.

If you want to get your hands dirty and try building Visual D yourself, 
see http://www.dsource.org/projects/visuald/wiki/Build_from_source. 
There is also a "build" project in the solution to help with the 
pre-compilation-steps.

Please note, that the current github HEAD compiler has a bad bug when it 
comes to COM interfaces, but there is already a pull to the rescue 
(https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/2537). Using the 
released dmd 2.063 should work. The releases are built with a patched 
compiler and runtime to support precise garbage collection, though.

Rainer



 Sep 09 2013



 next sibling parent  Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com>  writes:


On 2013-09-10 08:49, Rainer Schuetze wrote:


 I'm planning to move the issues from the dsource bug database to
 bugzilla. Does anyone have experience with converting trac issues to
 bugzilla? There are currently 60 open reports (half of them enhancement
 requests), so it should also be possible to do this manually.


Bugzilla has an REST API:

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:REST_API

Don't know if the D bugzilla has that enabled.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling  parent  Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de>  writes:


On 10.09.2013 08:49, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 I'm planning to move the issues from the dsource bug database to
 bugzilla. Does anyone have experience with converting trac issues to
 bugzilla? There are currently 60 open reports (half of them enhancement
 requests), so it should also be possible to do this manually.


I have downloaded the tickets from trac by just getting the html pages 
and extracted the reports and comments as text. Here is the result of 
the oldest bug entry when added to bugzilla: 
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11014

Is this format ok? If yes, I can transfer the other 50+ reports in the 
same way.



 Sep 11 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net>  writes:


On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a 
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage 
 into Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in 
 agreement on this.

 What do you think?


Since it's official I think it'd be nice to add to the Windows 
Installer.  I'll get started adding it if you or Andrei give me 
the go ahead.

Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added to 
the installer.



 Sep 10 2013



 next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org>  writes:


On 9/10/13 9:31 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


 Since it's official I think it'd be nice to add to the Windows
 Installer.  I'll get started adding it if you or Andrei give me the go
 ahead.


Yes please. Make it an opt-out choice.


 Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added to the
 installer.


That should probably be in all installers.


Andrei



 Sep 10 2013



  parent reply Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de>  writes:


On 10.09.2013 20:03, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/10/13 9:31 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


 Since it's official I think it'd be nice to add to the Windows
 Installer.  I'll get started adding it if you or Andrei give me the go
 ahead.


 Yes please. Make it an opt-out choice.


Alternatively, I could add dmd to the Visual D installer. If the files 
are actually inside the package, I guess it is a bit easier this way 
because the Visual D installer does quite a bit of registration and 
patching.

But both installers use NSIS, so it shouldn't be a big deal to merge 
them either way.



 Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added to the
 installer.


 That should probably be in all installers.


 Andrei





 Sep 10 2013



  parent reply "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net>  writes:


On Wednesday, 11 September 2013 at 06:31:50 UTC, Rainer Schuetze 
wrote:

 On 10.09.2013 20:03, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/10/13 9:31 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD 
 is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D 
 usage into
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in 
 agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


 Since it's official I think it'd be nice to add to the Windows
 Installer.  I'll get started adding it if you or Andrei give 
 me the go
 ahead.


 Yes please. Make it an opt-out choice.


 Alternatively, I could add dmd to the Visual D installer. If 
 the files are actually inside the package, I guess it is a bit 
 easier this way because the Visual D installer does quite a bit 
 of registration and patching.

 But both installers use NSIS, so it shouldn't be a big deal to 
 merge them either way.



 Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added 
 to the
 installer.


 That should probably be in all installers.


 Andrei




I was just going to have the DMD installer download Visual-D's 
installer and run it.  Seemed like the easiest approach.  This 
would make it so Visual-D's releases aren't tied to DMD's and 
people could upgrade Visual-D independently if a new release 
comes out.  Every release of DMD we'd just update the Visual-D 
installer URL to match the current release.



 Sep 11 2013



 next sibling parent reply Rainer Schuetze <r.sagitario gmx.de>  writes:


On 11.09.2013 18:06, Brad Anderson wrote:

 On Wednesday, 11 September 2013 at 06:31:50 UTC, Rainer Schuetze wrote:

 Alternatively, I could add dmd to the Visual D installer. If the files
 are actually inside the package, I guess it is a bit easier this way
 because the Visual D installer does quite a bit of registration and
 patching.


 I was just going to have the DMD installer download Visual-D's installer
 and run it.  Seemed like the easiest approach.  This would make it so
 Visual-D's releases aren't tied to DMD's and people could upgrade
 Visual-D independently if a new release comes out.  Every release of DMD
 we'd just update the Visual-D installer URL to match the current release.


Ok, that should be fine, too. Does the Installer store the path to the 
installed DMD somewhere, so that it doesn't need to be entered again in 
the Visual D installer?



 Sep 11 2013



  parent  "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net>  writes:


On Wednesday, 11 September 2013 at 20:27:57 UTC, Rainer Schuetze 
wrote:

 On 11.09.2013 18:06, Brad Anderson wrote:

 On Wednesday, 11 September 2013 at 06:31:50 UTC, Rainer 
 Schuetze wrote:

 Alternatively, I could add dmd to the Visual D installer. If 
 the files
 are actually inside the package, I guess it is a bit easier 
 this way
 because the Visual D installer does quite a bit of 
 registration and
 patching.


 I was just going to have the DMD installer download Visual-D's 
 installer
 and run it.  Seemed like the easiest approach.  This would 
 make it so
 Visual-D's releases aren't tied to DMD's and people could 
 upgrade
 Visual-D independently if a new release comes out.  Every 
 release of DMD
 we'd just update the Visual-D installer URL to match the 
 current release.


 Ok, that should be fine, too. Does the Installer store the path 
 to the installed DMD somewhere, so that it doesn't need to be 
 entered again in the Visual D installer?


In the registry, yeah. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\D\Install_Dir



 Sep 11 2013



prev sibling  parent  Manu <turkeyman gmail.com>  writes:


On 12 September 2013 02:06, Brad Anderson <eco gnuk.net> wrote:


 On Wednesday, 11 September 2013 at 06:31:50 UTC, Rainer Schuetze wrote:


 On 10.09.2013 20:03, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 On 9/10/13 9:31 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:


 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:


 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)

 Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
 this.

 What do you think?


 Since it's official I think it'd be nice to add to the Windows
 Installer.  I'll get started adding it if you or Andrei give me the go
 ahead.


 Yes please. Make it an opt-out choice.


 Alternatively, I could add dmd to the Visual D installer. If the files
 are actually inside the package, I guess it is a bit easier this way
 because the Visual D installer does quite a bit of registration and
 patching.

 But both installers use NSIS, so it shouldn't be a big deal to merge them
 either way.




  Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added to the

 installer.


 That should probably be in all installers.


 Andrei




 I was just going to have the DMD installer download Visual-D's installer
 and run it.  Seemed like the easiest approach.  This would make it so
 Visual-D's releases aren't tied to DMD's and people could upgrade Visual-D
 independently if a new release comes out.  Every release of DMD we'd just
 update the Visual-D installer URL to match the current release.


Or just point at 'latest' somehow?

The most important thing is that the Visual-D installer doesn't need to ask
the user where he chose to install DMD only a few seconds prior.



 Sep 11 2013



prev sibling  parent reply "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com>  writes:


On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 18:31:11 Brad Anderson wrote:

 Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added to
 the installer.


I would expect that to only happen if it became the official package manager, 
which AFAIK hasn't even been discussed recently let alone actually happened. 
But its usage is on the rise, and I could definitely see it becoming the
official 
package manager at some point.

- Jonathan M Davis



 Sep 10 2013



  parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org>  writes:


On 9/10/13 11:37 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 18:31:11 Brad Anderson wrote:

 Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added to
 the installer.


 I would expect that to only happen if it became the official package manager,
 which AFAIK hasn't even been discussed recently let alone actually happened.
 But its usage is on the rise, and I could definitely see it becoming the
official
 package manager at some point.


Maybe the time has come to discuss that. Should we make dub the official 
package manager for D?

Andrei



 Sep 10 2013



 next sibling parent  "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net>  writes:


On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 18:54:10 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/10/13 11:37 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 18:31:11 Brad Anderson wrote:

 Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added 
 to
 the installer.


 I would expect that to only happen if it became the official 
 package manager,
 which AFAIK hasn't even been discussed recently let alone 
 actually happened.
 But its usage is on the rise, and I could definitely see it 
 becoming the official
 package manager at some point.


 Maybe the time has come to discuss that. Should we make dub the 
 official package manager for D?

 Andrei


I asked Sönke about this back when dub was called VPM (so a lot 
of the answer is out of date now).  His reply:

http://forum.rejectedsoftware.com/groups/rejectedsoftware.vibed/post/79

It'd be nice if he could update with what he thinks is left 
before it'd be ready to be the official package manager.  I've 
hit a bug here or there in my own usage of dub but overall I find 
it to be very good (and Sönke usually fixes things I've hit in 
less than a day).  There is a potential package format switch to 
Simple Declarative Language that should probably come before dub 
is official and some general final polishing but overall it feels 
really close to being ready to me.



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv>  writes:


On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 18:54:10 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 9/10/13 11:37 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 18:31:11 Brad Anderson wrote:

 Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added 
 to
 the installer.


 I would expect that to only happen if it became the official 
 package manager,
 which AFAIK hasn't even been discussed recently let alone 
 actually happened.
 But its usage is on the rise, and I could definitely see it 
 becoming the official
 package manager at some point.


 Maybe the time has come to discuss that. Should we make dub the 
 official package manager for D?

 Andrei


Well, it has almost become one de-facto.



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com>  writes:


10-Sep-2013 22:54, Andrei Alexandrescu пишет:

 On 9/10/13 11:37 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 18:31:11 Brad Anderson wrote:

 Once dub is a bit more mature I think it too should be added to
 the installer.


 I would expect that to only happen if it became the official package
 manager,
 which AFAIK hasn't even been discussed recently let alone actually
 happened.
 But its usage is on the rise, and I could definitely see it becoming
 the official
 package manager at some point.


 Maybe the time has come to discuss that. Should we make dub the official
 package manager for D?


Good idea, seeing as it's the only one being actively worked.
Plus it seems to have really caught on.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 10/09/13 20:54, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Maybe the time has come to discuss that. Should we make dub the official
package
 manager for D?


Question from a complete non-user of dub -- how does it determine which D 
compiler(s) to install libraries for/with?  I almost never use DMD for anything 
apart from work on Phobos, but I alternate frequently between GDC and LDC.  I'd 
need a package manager that would play nice with that kind of switching and 
swapping.



 Sep 10 2013



  parent  "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net>  writes:


On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 19:48:58 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:

 On 10/09/13 20:54, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Maybe the time has come to discuss that. Should we make dub 
 the official package
 manager for D?


 Question from a complete non-user of dub -- how does it 
 determine which D compiler(s) to install libraries for/with?  I 
 almost never use DMD for anything apart from work on Phobos, 
 but I alternate frequently between GDC and LDC.  I'd need a 
 package manager that would play nice with that kind of 
 switching and swapping.


--compiler=gdc/ldc is all you need to do to use compilers other 
than dmd.  It doesn't normally install packages into the 
compiler's existing library/source search paths but rather 
specifies the path to dependencies during building.  Packages are 
normally installed to somewhere in your user directory (I can't 
remember where exactly, somewhere like ~dub/packages).  You can 
also install packages as a directory in the current directory 
(--local) or system wide (--system).  I find the default behavior 
works just fine for me though.



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com>  writes:


On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:54:10 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Maybe the time has come to discuss that. Should we make dub the official
 package manager for D?


Fine with me, though we should probably create a new thread for that as a lot 
of people wouldn't notice it in this thread, which is already fairly long.

- Jonathan M Davis



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling  parent  Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 9/10/2013 11:54 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Maybe the time has come to discuss that. Should we make dub the official
package
 manager for D?


Akk, please start a new thread for that!



 Sep 10 2013



prev sibling  parent reply "eles" <eles eles.com>  writes:


On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a 
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage 
 into Microsoft Visual Studio.)


Allow me to support this idea, however to suggest that also add a 
cross-platform IDE/plug-in.

This is important for the Linux world.

Current choices are DDT, for Eclipse and Mono-D, for MonoDevelop.

I would vote for the two for the time being and see how things 
develop.

Official endorsement should increase their visibility, their use 
and, why not, patches.

In the future, they could also be integrated in the installer.

I would also suggest to move DDT on github (Mono-D is already 
there).

All these, of course, only if respective authors agree. I kindly 
ask them to provide their POV.

BTW, kudos to Alexander Bothe and Bruno Medeiros.

For the record, I am a heavy user of Eclipse/CDT on Linux, and my 
colleagues are almost all users of the same, albeit some of them 
on Windows. I could testify for the popularity of IDEs in some 
environments, particularly for Eclipse CDT (although I would 
prefer to have Eclipse and CDT written in D or C/C++, not in 
Java, but this is life...).



 Sep 13 2013



 next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com>  writes:


On 2013-09-13 09:46, eles wrote:


 For the record, I am a heavy user of Eclipse/CDT on Linux, and my
 colleagues are almost all users of the same, albeit some of them on
 Windows. I could testify for the popularity of IDEs in some
 environments, particularly for Eclipse CDT (although I would prefer to
 have Eclipse and CDT written in D or C/C++, not in Java, but this is
 life...).


SWT, the widget toolkit used by Eclipse, is already ported to D (DWT). 
In addition to that several other Eclipse related projects are ported to 
D, although not up to date.

https://github.com/d-widget-toolkit/dwt

There's an old abandon IDE project, called Poseidon, which uses a really 
old version of DWT. It looks quite similar to Eclipse:

http://dsource.org/projects/poseidon
http://dsource.org/projects/poseidon/wiki/Screenshots

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg



 Sep 13 2013



  parent  "eles" <eles eles.com>  writes:


On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 12:24:06 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:

 On 2013-09-13 09:46, eles wrote:

 SWT, the widget toolkit used by Eclipse, is already ported to D 
 (DWT). In addition to that several other Eclipse related 
 projects are ported to D, although not up to date.

 https://github.com/d-widget-toolkit/dwt

 There's an old abandon IDE project, called Poseidon, which uses 
 a really old version of DWT. It looks quite similar to Eclipse:

 http://dsource.org/projects/poseidon
 http://dsource.org/projects/poseidon/wiki/Screenshots


Thank you, but for the time being we're not there. However, the 
goal is not to rewrite Eclipse in D, but having DDT and Mono-D 
endorsed officially, to provide a Linux alternative to the 
VisualD.



 Sep 13 2013



prev sibling  parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 13/09/2013 08:46, eles wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)


 Allow me to support this idea, however to suggest that also add a
 cross-platform IDE/plug-in.

 This is important for the Linux world.

 Current choices are DDT, for Eclipse and Mono-D, for MonoDevelop.

 I would vote for the two for the time being and see how things develop.

 Official endorsement should increase their visibility, their use and,
 why not, patches.

 In the future, they could also be integrated in the installer.

 I would also suggest to move DDT on github (Mono-D is already there).

 All these, of course, only if respective authors agree. I kindly ask
 them to provide their POV.


It's not clear to me what any of these measures would help with.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Manu's point with regards with IDE 
"official endorsement" was more to try to have the D language 
organization devs (Walter, Andrei, etc.) *use* VisualD or another IDE 
and understand the issues around it (especially with regards to 
compiler/debugger integration).

Just having them make an "official endorsement" of an IDE, or putting it 
in the DLang github, but without actually using it much, that I'm not 
sure what it would achieve. The vast majority of other D users will just 
use the IDE of their choice regardless. The number of contributors to 
VisualD is likely to not change much either, I suspect.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 16 2013



 next sibling parent reply Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com>  writes:


On 9/16/13 8:52 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Manu's point with regards with IDE
"official endorsement" was
 more to try to have the D language organization devs (Walter, Andrei, etc.)
*use* VisualD or another
 IDE and understand the issues around it (especially with regards to
compiler/debugger integration).


If that's the definition of official endorsement, then sorry, not likely to
ever happen.  Demanding 
that the core devs develop with specific tools is ridiculous in concept.  Would
you switch because 
someone told you to?  Me either.  I've been using vi(m) for about 20 years now.
 My fingers know 
what to do without conscious control.. I don't have the free time nor the
desire to retrain myself 
like that.


 Just having them make an "official endorsement" of an IDE, or putting it in
the DLang github, but
 without actually using it much, that I'm not sure what it would achieve. The
vast majority of other
 D users will just use the IDE of their choice regardless. The number of
contributors to VisualD is
 likely to not change much either, I suspect.


There's value in just elevating something to the label official.  Bundling with
releases.  Including 
on the downloads page.  Increased discussion and awareness.  Etc.



 Sep 16 2013



  parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 16/09/2013 22:39, Brad Roberts wrote:

 On 9/16/13 8:52 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Manu's point with regards with
 IDE "official endorsement" was
 more to try to have the D language organization devs (Walter, Andrei,
 etc.) *use* VisualD or another
 IDE and understand the issues around it (especially with regards to
 compiler/debugger integration).


 If that's the definition of official endorsement, then sorry, not likely
 to ever happen.  Demanding that the core devs develop with specific
 tools is ridiculous in concept.  Would you switch because someone told
 you to?  Me either.  I've been using vi(m) for about 20 years now.  My
 fingers know what to do without conscious control.. I don't have the
 free time nor the desire to retrain myself like that.


I agree, I don't think it's a realistic to expect that. I was just 
pointing out Manu's idea, not agreeing with it.


 Just having them make an "official endorsement" of an IDE, or putting
 it in the DLang github, but
 without actually using it much, that I'm not sure what it would
 achieve. The vast majority of other
 D users will just use the IDE of their choice regardless. The number
 of contributors to VisualD is
 likely to not change much either, I suspect.


 There's value in just elevating something to the label official.
 Bundling with releases.  Including on the downloads page.  Increased
 discussion and awareness.  Etc.


Is that going to happen? Bundling VisualD with DMD releases? Or just 
including it in the downloads page?

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 17 2013



  parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 17/09/2013 12:37, Bruno Medeiros wrote:

 On 16/09/2013 22:39, Brad Roberts wrote:

 On 9/16/13 8:52 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Manu's point with regards with
 IDE "official endorsement" was
 more to try to have the D language organization devs (Walter, Andrei,
 etc.) *use* VisualD or another
 IDE and understand the issues around it (especially with regards to
 compiler/debugger integration).


 If that's the definition of official endorsement, then sorry, not likely
 to ever happen.  Demanding that the core devs develop with specific
 tools is ridiculous in concept.  Would you switch because someone told
 you to?  Me either.  I've been using vi(m) for about 20 years now.  My
 fingers know what to do without conscious control.. I don't have the
 free time nor the desire to retrain myself like that.


 I agree, I don't think it's a realistic to expect that. I was just
 pointing out Manu's idea, not agreeing with it.


Clarification: I think it's unrealistic to expected the core devs to use 
the IDE for all of their D development, yes. But it would be good to 
have them *try* it, to see how it works, to understand how others users 
would develop in D, what quality issues there could be with it, etc. In 
this regard I agree with Manu's comments.


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 17 2013



  parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com>  writes:


On 17 September 2013 21:48, Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>wrote:


 On 17/09/2013 12:37, Bruno Medeiros wrote:


 On 16/09/2013 22:39, Brad Roberts wrote:


 On 9/16/13 8:52 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:


 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Manu's point with regards with
 IDE "official endorsement" was
 more to try to have the D language organization devs (Walter, Andrei,
 etc.) *use* VisualD or another
 IDE and understand the issues around it (especially with regards to
 compiler/debugger integration).


 If that's the definition of official endorsement, then sorry, not likely
 to ever happen.  Demanding that the core devs develop with specific
 tools is ridiculous in concept.  Would you switch because someone told
 you to?  Me either.  I've been using vi(m) for about 20 years now.  My
 fingers know what to do without conscious control.. I don't have the
 free time nor the desire to retrain myself like that.


 I agree, I don't think it's a realistic to expect that. I was just
 pointing out Manu's idea, not agreeing with it.


 Clarification: I think it's unrealistic to expected the core devs to use
 the IDE for all of their D development, yes. But it would be good to have
 them *try* it, to see how it works, to understand how others users would
 develop in D, what quality issues there could be with it, etc. In this
 regard I agree with Manu's comments.



I'll happily wear that my assertion was heavy handed, mostly due to
long-term frustration, and to some extent, this is just the way I talk
(which never comes across in text to people who don't know me).
Regardless of how I phrased it however, I'm encouraged to see the message
was generally well received and actions have been taken. I'm keen to see
if/how it affects the ecosystem in the future.
I hope it does increase the overall attention/awareness.



 Sep 17 2013



  parent  "Flamaros" <flamaros.xavier gmail.com>  writes:


On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 13:03:46 UTC, Manu wrote:

 On 17 September 2013 21:48, Bruno Medeiros 
 <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>wrote:


 On 17/09/2013 12:37, Bruno Medeiros wrote:


 On 16/09/2013 22:39, Brad Roberts wrote:


 On 9/16/13 8:52 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:


 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Manu's point with 
 regards with
 IDE "official endorsement" was
 more to try to have the D language organization devs 
 (Walter, Andrei,
 etc.) *use* VisualD or another
 IDE and understand the issues around it (especially with 
 regards to
 compiler/debugger integration).


 If that's the definition of official endorsement, then 
 sorry, not likely
 to ever happen.  Demanding that the core devs develop with 
 specific
 tools is ridiculous in concept.  Would you switch because 
 someone told
 you to?  Me either.  I've been using vi(m) for about 20 
 years now.  My
 fingers know what to do without conscious control.. I don't 
 have the
 free time nor the desire to retrain myself like that.


 I agree, I don't think it's a realistic to expect that. I was 
 just
 pointing out Manu's idea, not agreeing with it.


 Clarification: I think it's unrealistic to expected the core 
 devs to use
 the IDE for all of their D development, yes. But it would be 
 good to have
 them *try* it, to see how it works, to understand how others 
 users would
 develop in D, what quality issues there could be with it, etc. 
 In this
 regard I agree with Manu's comments.



 I'll happily wear that my assertion was heavy handed, mostly 
 due to
 long-term frustration, and to some extent, this is just the way 
 I talk
 (which never comes across in text to people who don't know me).
 Regardless of how I phrased it however, I'm encouraged to see 
 the message
 was generally well received and actions have been taken. I'm 
 keen to see
 if/how it affects the ecosystem in the future.
 I hope it does increase the overall attention/awareness.


It's certains if the D language organization devs use "official" 
IDEs the quality will be improve greatly.

Good reports can only come from real usages, IDEs are critical 
for productivity the GUI polish is something important but hard 
to achieved.

On my project DQuick, VisualD just can't find members of classes 
aren't directly defined in the current module. I also try the 
beta of next version for code coverage with unittest without any 
success.



 Sep 19 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com>  writes:


On 17 September 2013 01:52, Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>wrote:


 On 13/09/2013 08:46, eles wrote:


 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:


 Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
 critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
 Microsoft Visual Studio.)


 Allow me to support this idea, however to suggest that also add a
 cross-platform IDE/plug-in.

 This is important for the Linux world.

 Current choices are DDT, for Eclipse and Mono-D, for MonoDevelop.

 I would vote for the two for the time being and see how things develop.

 Official endorsement should increase their visibility, their use and,
 why not, patches.

 In the future, they could also be integrated in the installer.

 I would also suggest to move DDT on github (Mono-D is already there).

 All these, of course, only if respective authors agree. I kindly ask
 them to provide their POV.


 It's not clear to me what any of these measures would help with.

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Manu's point with regards with IDE
 "official endorsement" was more to try to have the D language organization
 devs (Walter, Andrei, etc.) *use* VisualD or another IDE and understand the
 issues around it (especially with regards to compiler/debugger integration).

 Just having them make an "official endorsement" of an IDE, or putting it
 in the DLang github, but without actually using it much, that I'm not sure
 what it would achieve. The vast majority of other D users will just use the
 IDE of their choice regardless. The number of contributors to VisualD is
 likely to not change much either, I suspect.



Well, currently the number of Visual-D contributors is exactly 1. I don't
find it that impossible to see a 2x, maybe even 3x increase in contributors.
I think the most important point though, is that the bugs are in the same
tracker as all the rest, and in all contributors faces. Which means all
contributors, regardless of their ...orientation, will have some sense of
the health of a critically important part of the eco-system. It also offers
better data to strategy discussions and whatnot.

Remeber, this isn't about 'the vast majority of other D users'. This is
about the VAST majority who _are not yet D users_. And many of them
consider lack of VisualStudio, or maybe another full featured IDE offering,
a hands-down deal breaker. It's also a statement about the
polish/ready-ness of the language.
So I think it's in the interest of all D users to know about the health of
this part of the ecosystem if they want to see the language succeed...
which will eventually lead to abundance of libraries, and tested frameworks
that the community today is simply too small to develop/maintain.



 Sep 16 2013



  parent  Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 17/09/2013 02:30, Manu wrote:

 On 17 September 2013 01:52, Bruno Medeiros
 <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com <mailto:brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>>
 wrote:

     On 13/09/2013 08:46, eles wrote:

         On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

             Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a
             critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D
             usage into
             Microsoft Visual Studio.)


         Allow me to support this idea, however to suggest that also add a
         cross-platform IDE/plug-in.

         This is important for the Linux world.

         Current choices are DDT, for Eclipse and Mono-D, for MonoDevelop.

         I would vote for the two for the time being and see how things
         develop.

         Official endorsement should increase their visibility, their use
         and,
         why not, patches.

         In the future, they could also be integrated in the installer.

         I would also suggest to move DDT on github (Mono-D is already
         there).

         All these, of course, only if respective authors agree. I kindly ask
         them to provide their POV.


     It's not clear to me what any of these measures would help with.

     Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Manu's point with regards with
     IDE "official endorsement" was more to try to have the D language
     organization devs (Walter, Andrei, etc.) *use* VisualD or another
     IDE and understand the issues around it (especially with regards to
     compiler/debugger integration).

     Just having them make an "official endorsement" of an IDE, or
     putting it in the DLang github, but without actually using it much,
     that I'm not sure what it would achieve. The vast majority of other
     D users will just use the IDE of their choice regardless. The number
     of contributors to VisualD is likely to not change much either, I
     suspect.


 Well, currently the number of Visual-D contributors is exactly 1. I
 don't find it that impossible to see a 2x, maybe even 3x increase in
 contributors.
 I think the most important point though, is that the bugs are in the
 same tracker as all the rest, and in all contributors faces. Which means
 all contributors, regardless of their ...orientation, will have some
 sense of the health of a critically important part of the eco-system. It
 also offers better data to strategy discussions and whatnot.

 Remeber, this isn't about 'the vast majority of other D users'. This is
 about the VAST majority who _are not yet D users_. And many of them
 consider lack of VisualStudio, or maybe another full featured IDE
 offering, a hands-down deal breaker. It's also a statement about the
 polish/ready-ness of the language.
 So I think it's in the interest of all D users to know about the health
 of this part of the ecosystem if they want to see the language
 succeed... which will eventually lead to abundance of libraries, and
 tested frameworks that the community today is simply too small to
 develop/maintain.


Maybe, maybe not. The "health" of this part of the ecosystem might 
become more visible, yes, but it won't necessarily mean it will get 
better. The case with DWT is a very close parallel: it got promoted as 
an official GUI toolkit, yet it didn't seem to have a visible effect on 
contributions.

But at this point I don't think it's worth guessing, we'll just have to 
wait and see.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 17 2013



prev sibling next sibling parent  Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net>  writes:


On 16/09/13 23:39, Brad Roberts wrote:

 If that's the definition of official endorsement, then sorry, not likely to
ever
 happen.  Demanding that the core devs develop with specific tools is ridiculous
 in concept.  Would you switch because someone told you to?  Me either.  I've
 been using vi(m) for about 20 years now.  My fingers know what to do without
 conscious control.. I don't have the free time nor the desire to retrain myself
 like that.


However, if you're a core project dev, it _can_ make sense to deliberately 
explore the usability of your code from the point of view of someone using a 
particular popular tool, even if it's not part of your day to day workflow.

It's amazing how many adoption problems can be solved simply by putting a
little 
bit of effort into understanding how to make it _easy_ for people to get your 
work up and running with their habitual toolchain.

Of course it'd be wrong to demand that core devs develop with specific tools, 
but it's not at all wrong to suggest that they regularly try out alternative 
toolchains so that they have personal experience of the kinds of problems that 
users will encounter.



 Sep 17 2013



prev sibling  parent reply "eles" <eles eles.com>  writes:


On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 15:52:26 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
wrote:

 On 13/09/2013 08:46, eles wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:


 It's not clear to me what any of these measures would help with.


Glad that you answered.

It will help with:

1) people already contributing to the D chains generally use
github, so they are familiar with the workflow, the interface,
the code-review etc. This will increase the probability to
contribute with a PR, even if for small glitches (or
documentation) in the beginning (BTW me, for one, I find the
interface on code.google to be awful at best, when compared to
github).

2) people that are in the D community know about Eclipse/DDT.
However, those passing by and wondering about what the D language
means, *and* are Eclipse users, they tend to not really know
about it. Having it officially endorsed, visible on the download
page and so on, will help them in using it (and, with a bit of
chance, contributing to it).

As a sidenote: we use a lot Eclipse/CDT when working in C/C++,
but with an external Makefile. You have best of two worlds: an
IDE, and an autotools/make integration. Let's not even speak that
the Makefile itself is just a shell around scons/SConstruct.



 Sep 17 2013



  parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 17/09/2013 15:48, eles wrote:

 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 15:52:26 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
 wrote:

 On 13/09/2013 08:46, eles wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:


 It's not clear to me what any of these measures would help with.


 Glad that you answered.

 It will help with:

 1) people already contributing to the D chains generally use
 github, so they are familiar with the workflow, the interface,
 the code-review etc. This will increase the probability to
 contribute with a PR, even if for small glitches (or
 documentation) in the beginning (BTW me, for one, I find the
 interface on code.google to be awful at best, when compared to
 github).


This is more of an issue of project hosting than whether it's officially 
endorsed/listed or not. I could move the hosting of DDT from Google Code 
to Github and potentially reap some of those benefits, regardless of 
DLang endorsement or not. (In hindsight I do agree it might have been 
better to have it hosted on Github. Google Code seems to have stagnated 
a bit while Github is getting more popular and getting better - but 
things were different when I switched away from DSource.org)


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 17 2013



  parent reply "eles" <eles eles.com>  writes:


On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 15:34:15 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
wrote:

 On 17/09/2013 15:48, eles wrote:

 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 15:52:26 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
 wrote:

 On 13/09/2013 08:46, eles wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 19:05:03 UTC, Walter Bright






 (In hindsight I do agree it might have been better to have it 
 hosted on Github.


I encourage you to do that, in the beginning. After the VisualD
move will mature a bit and, hopefully, DDT will integrate with
the debugger, it will become official.

Speaking about that, did you have the time to have a look at
Descent's debugging module? Recently, Iain really improved gdc's
gdb debugging support, and supporting at least gdb (it is usable
on Windows, too) would be a break-through.



 Sep 17 2013



  parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 18/09/2013 07:58, eles wrote:

 Speaking about that, did you have the time to have a look at
 Descent's debugging module? Recently, Iain really improved gdc's
 gdb debugging support, and supporting at least gdb (it is usable
 on Windows, too) would be a break-through.


Not yet.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 18 2013



  parent reply "eles" <eles eles.com>  writes:


On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 13:21:45 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
wrote:

 On 18/09/2013 07:58, eles wrote:
 Not yet.


How could I help?



 Sep 18 2013



 next sibling parent  Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 18/09/2013 14:41, eles wrote:

 On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 13:21:45 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
 wrote:

 On 18/09/2013 07:58, eles wrote:
 Not yet.


 How could I help?


If you're willing to spend enough time, you can try implementing 
debugger support yourself:
http://www.eclipse.org/articles/Article-Debugger/how-to.html

But otherwise just doing something half-way is not gonna help much (if 
that means I have to spend a lot of time reviewing and modyfing the 
contribution, close to as much as if I were implementing it myself).

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 20 2013



prev sibling  parent  Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com>  writes:


On 18/09/2013 14:41, eles wrote:

 On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 13:21:45 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
 wrote:

 On 18/09/2013 07:58, eles wrote:
 Not yet.


 How could I help?


Actually, check my thread "Debugging support for D - wiki". You might be 
able to help with research and trying out debuggers for configurations I 
can't (or simply haven't) tried myself.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer



 Sep 23 2013