www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - The new std.process?

reply "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
Wasn't someone working on a std.process overhaul? What ever happened to 
that?
Apr 09 2012
parent reply "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Monday, April 09, 2012 18:31:05 Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Wasn't someone working on a std.process overhaul? What ever happened to
 that?


Lars and Steven did it a while back, but the Windows port required changes in 
the Windows runtime that comes with dmd (due to a pipe-related bug IIRC), so 
there's been no point in reviewing it. I _think_ that Walter might have finally 
gotten those changes in in the last release, but I don't know. Regardless, 
until those changes are in, the new std.process is pretty much stuck. You can 
find the code here though:

https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos/tree/new-std-process

- Jonathan M Davis
Apr 09 2012
parent reply "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.1555.1334014282.4860.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...

 On Monday, April 09, 2012 18:31:05 Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Wasn't someone working on a std.process overhaul? What ever happened to
 that?


 Lars and Steven did it a while back, but the Windows port required changes 
 in
 the Windows runtime that comes with dmd (due to a pipe-related bug IIRC), 
 so
 there's been no point in reviewing it. I _think_ that Walter might have 
 finally
 gotten those changes in in the last release, but I don't know. Regardless,
 until those changes are in, the new std.process is pretty much stuck. You 
 can
 find the code here though:

 https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos/tree/new-std-process


Oh yea. *Now* I remember asking the same thing before and getting pretty 
much the same answer...

I didn't mean to sound like I'm nagging anyone about it. It's not urgent for 
me right now. It's just that whenever I get to thinking about the idea of 
heavy cmdline-scripting style stuff in D, it occurs to me that the 
std.process imporovements would be a big help, and then I manage to 
completely forget everything about it except a vague recollection that there 
was some sort of std.process stuff on the horizon ;)
Apr 09 2012
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 4/9/12 9:38 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 "Jonathan M Davis"<jmdavisProg gmx.com>  wrote in message

 https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos/tree/new-std-process


 Oh yea. *Now* I remember asking the same thing before and getting pretty
 much the same answer...


Shall we add that to the review queue?

Andrei
Apr 09 2012
parent reply "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 22:48:26 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:


 On 4/9/12 9:38 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 "Jonathan M Davis"<jmdavisProg gmx.com>  wrote in message

 https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos/tree/new-std-process


 Oh yea. *Now* I remember asking the same thing before and getting pretty
 much the same answer...




I think you must have felt a disturbance in the force.  Literally  
yesterday at around 8:30 am, I finally got around to verifying 2.058  
includes the pipe fix (and it does!), so I think we are clear to get this  
ready for review.  Hopefully by 2.060 (2.059 is out for beta right now).


 Shall we add that to the review queue?


It's on the trello board for phobos reviews, in development.  I need to  
get in touch with Lars, it's his baby.

BTW, I can't stress how much I dislike windows D development, especially  
when I have to use git.  Linux just seems so much easier, that I dread  
ever having to test D windows stuff.  I suppose if it was my main  
platform, I wouldn't have to scrap around setting shit up every time I  
want to test something.

-Steve
Apr 10 2012
next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2012-04-10 13:18, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:


 BTW, I can't stress how much I dislike windows D development, especially
 when I have to use git. Linux just seems so much easier, that I dread
 ever having to test D windows stuff. I suppose if it was my main
 platform, I wouldn't have to scrap around setting shit up every time I
 want to test something.

 -Steve


I agree. I recommend you use the git shell, which is basically cygwin.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Apr 10 2012
parent reply "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 07:41:23 -0400, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:


 On 2012-04-10 13:18, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:


 BTW, I can't stress how much I dislike windows D development, especially
 when I have to use git. Linux just seems so much easier, that I dread
 ever having to test D windows stuff. I suppose if it was my main
 platform, I wouldn't have to scrap around setting shit up every time I
 want to test something.

 -Steve


 I agree. I recommend you use the git shell, which is basically cygwin.


I do.  I still hate it :)  I suppose this time it was because I had to  
merge specifically 2.058 changes, so I had to use a tag (never did that  
before, and because of my typo, it wasn't working).

-Steve
Apr 10 2012
next sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2012-04-10 13:47, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 07:41:23 -0400, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:


 On 2012-04-10 13:18, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:


 BTW, I can't stress how much I dislike windows D development, especially
 when I have to use git. Linux just seems so much easier, that I dread
 ever having to test D windows stuff. I suppose if it was my main
 platform, I wouldn't have to scrap around setting shit up every time I
 want to test something.

 -Steve


 I agree. I recommend you use the git shell, which is basically cygwin.


 I do. I still hate it :)


Can't argue with you there :)

This kind of software development works so much better on a Posix system.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Apr 10 2012
prev sibling parent =?UTF-8?B?QWxleCBSw7hubmUgUGV0ZXJzZW4=?= <xtzgzorex gmail.com> writes:
On 10-04-2012 13:47, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 07:41:23 -0400, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:


 On 2012-04-10 13:18, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:


 BTW, I can't stress how much I dislike windows D development, especially
 when I have to use git. Linux just seems so much easier, that I dread
 ever having to test D windows stuff. I suppose if it was my main
 platform, I wouldn't have to scrap around setting shit up every time I
 want to test something.

 -Steve


 I agree. I recommend you use the git shell, which is basically cygwin.


 I do. I still hate it :) I suppose this time it was because I had to
 merge specifically 2.058 changes, so I had to use a tag (never did that
 before, and because of my typo, it wasn't working).

 -Steve


Do you use mintty? It _really_ helps. It's much better than those dumb 
bash-in-cmd.exe approaches.

-- 
- Alex
Apr 10 2012
prev sibling parent reply "Lars T. Kyllingstad" <public kyllingen.net> writes:
On Tuesday, 10 April 2012 at 11:18:53 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:

 On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 22:48:26 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu 
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:


 On 4/9/12 9:38 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 "Jonathan M Davis"<jmdavisProg gmx.com>  wrote in message

 https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos/tree/new-std-process


 Oh yea. *Now* I remember asking the same thing before and 
 getting pretty
 much the same answer...




 I think you must have felt a disturbance in the force.  
 Literally yesterday at around 8:30 am, I finally got around to 
 verifying 2.058 includes the pipe fix (and it does!), so I 
 think we are clear to get this ready for review.  Hopefully by 
 2.060 (2.059 is out for beta right now).


I must have felt the same disturbance.  I logged in to Trello *by 
coincidence* mere minutes after you had checked this off the 
to-do list, and it's been months since the last time I logged in 
there.



 Shall we add that to the review queue?


 It's on the trello board for phobos reviews, in development.  I 
 need to get in touch with Lars, it's his baby.


Also by coincidence, I decided to drop by the NG, and what do you 
know; a thread about std.process! :)  I agree it's high time to 
get this module ready for review.  Now that you have verified 
that pipes finally work on Windows, what remains is mostly 
cosmetic.  I think I'll have time to work on it this weekend.



 BTW, I can't stress how much I dislike windows D development, 
 especially when I have to use git.  Linux just seems so much 
 easier, that I dread ever having to test D windows stuff.  I 
 suppose if it was my main platform, I wouldn't have to scrap 
 around setting shit up every time I want to test something.


I can't stress enough how happy I was that you offered to do the 
Windows part of the module. ;)

-Lars
Apr 11 2012
parent reply Marco Leise <Marco.Leise gmx.de> writes:
Just stopping by to say I'm using your new std.process now. pipeProcess() is
what I was looking for to compare the output of a C program and the
corresponding D port.

-- 
Marco
Apr 27 2012
parent reply "Lars T. Kyllingstad" <public kyllingen.net> writes:
On Friday, 27 April 2012 at 20:47:10 UTC, Marco Leise wrote:

 Just stopping by to say I'm using your new std.process now. 
 pipeProcess() is what I was looking for to compare the output> 
 of a C program and the corresponding D port.


Awesome. :) Please let us know if you discover any bugs, or if 
you see anything that could be improved.

-Lars
Apr 27 2012
next sibling parent Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 4/28/12, Lars T. Kyllingstad <public kyllingen.net> wrote:

 Please let us know if you discover any bugs, or if
 you see anything that could be improved.


I've been out of the loop, but is this compilable now in 2.059 or do
we require some sort of DMC patch?
https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos.git
Apr 27 2012
prev sibling parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 4/28/12, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> wrote:

 On 4/28/12, Lars T. Kyllingstad <public kyllingen.net> wrote:

 Please let us know if you discover any bugs, or if
 you see anything that could be improved.


 I've been out of the loop, but is this compilable now in 2.059 or do
 we require some sort of DMC patch?
 https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos.git


I mean for win32 btw.
Apr 27 2012
parent "Lars T. Kyllingstad" <public kyllingen.net> writes:
On 28/04/12 00:19, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 4/28/12, Andrej Mitrovic<andrej.mitrovich gmail.com>  wrote:

 On 4/28/12, Lars T. Kyllingstad<public kyllingen.net>  wrote:

 Please let us know if you discover any bugs, or if
 you see anything that could be improved.


 I've been out of the loop, but is this compilable now in 2.059 or do
 we require some sort of DMC patch?
 https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos.git


 I mean for win32 btw.


AFAIK it is compilable with 2.059, but you need Steve's modifications to 
druntime as well.  Check out his new-std-process branch at

     https://github.com/schveiguy/druntime

-Lars
Apr 28 2012