www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.dwt - Building DWT on Win8/x64 with D2

reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
Hi,

Whenever I try to build DWT either with rake or rdmd, it fails.
More specifically, base compiles fine, but swt bogs down because 
several Win32 symbols are inaccessible. Do I have to derelic 
those before?

Greetings
Feb 14 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-14 18:52, Sebastian Graf wrote:

 Hi,

 Whenever I try to build DWT either with rake or rdmd, it fails.
 More specifically, base compiles fine, but swt bogs down because several
 Win32 symbols are inaccessible. Do I have to derelic those before?


It would help If you could post the compile/link errors here.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 14 2013
parent reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
On Thursday, 14 February 2013 at 19:46:28 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:

 On 2013-02-14 18:52, Sebastian Graf wrote:

 Hi,

 Whenever I try to build DWT either with rake or rdmd, it fails.
 More specifically, base compiles fine, but swt bogs down 
 because several
 Win32 symbols are inaccessible. Do I have to derelic those 
 before?


 It would help If you could post the compile/link errors here.


This is the combined output from 1> and 2> : 
http://pastebin.com/mricdjtn
Feb 14 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-14 20:57, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 This is the combined output from 1> and 2> : http://pastebin.com/mricdjtn


I think the problem is that the submodules are not update. I've updated 
them, give it a try now.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 14 2013
next sibling parent reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
On Thursday, 14 February 2013 at 20:15:00 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:

 On 2013-02-14 20:57, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 This is the combined output from 1> and 2> : 
 http://pastebin.com/mricdjtn


 I think the problem is that the submodules are not update. I've 
 updated them, give it a try now.


Thanks, that did it.
Feb 14 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-14 21:36, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 Thanks, that did it.


Cool :)

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 14 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
On Thursday, 14 February 2013 at 20:15:00 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:

 On 2013-02-14 20:57, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 This is the combined output from 1> and 2> : 
 http://pastebin.com/mricdjtn


 I think the problem is that the submodules are not update. I've 
 updated them, give it a try now.


Are there any plans to make DWT more D? I mean "trivial" things 
like fixing import names, unified getters and setters, mostly 
compatibility stuff. Is this even possible from a technical point 
of view?
Feb 14 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-14 22:04, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 Are there any plans to make DWT more D? I mean "trivial" things like
 fixing import names, unified getters and setters, mostly compatibility
 stuff. Is this even possible from a technical point of view?


What's wrong with the import names? First a foremost we're trying to 
keep the code as close as possible to the original Java code. This will 
help porting new versions in the future. Although adding properties 
would only be an addition and probably not interfere with future 
portings. Short answer: I don't know.

It should be an problem from a technical point of view.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 14 2013
parent reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
On Friday, 15 February 2013 at 07:25:49 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 What's wrong with the import names? First a foremost we're 
 trying to keep the code as close as possible to the original 
 Java code. This will help porting new versions in the future. 
 Although adding properties would only be an addition and 
 probably not interfere with future portings. Short answer: I 
 don't know.

 It should be an problem from a technical point of view.


I'd like to contribute something... Is there anything simple to
begin with?
Feb 15 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-15 09:45, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 I'd like to contribute something... Is there anything simple to
 begin with?


Could you first create a list of what you want more specifically to 
do/change to have it more D like.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 15 2013
parent reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
On Friday, 15 February 2013 at 09:55:52 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-02-15 09:45, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 I'd like to contribute something... Is there anything simple to
 begin with?


 Could you first create a list of what you want more 
 specifically to do/change to have it more D like.


That was actually not related to the D-ifying part rather than 
general points to help you with that project.
I have to say that I'm not at all familiar with the API right 
now, so the only specific point for improvement on my side is 
usage of D properties.

How did you generate the port? Was there a Java-D converter 
involved and are there any ways to incoporate changes into the 
process?
Feb 15 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-15 12:39, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 That was actually not related to the D-ifying part rather than general
 points to help you with that project.
 I have to say that I'm not at all familiar with the API right now, so
 the only specific point for improvement on my side is usage of D
 properties.


In general this is what's need to be done:

* Port snippets and make sure existing ones work
* Port later versions of SWT
* Port to 64bit
* Port the SWT test suite
* In general finding and fixing bugs


 How did you generate the port? Was there a Java-D converter involved and
 are there any ways to incoporate changes into the process?


It's a manual port. We tried to use a tool at one point but it didn't 
work very well. To much of the Java API needed to be ported.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 15 2013
parent reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
On Friday, 15 February 2013 at 12:04:25 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 In general this is what's need to be done:

 * Port snippets and make sure existing ones work
 * Port later versions of SWT
 * Port to 64bit
 * Port the SWT test suite
 * In general finding and fixing bugs


I'd like to give the test suite a shot. Which branch of SWT's git 
repository should I port? One of the 3.4 versions, 4.2 or even 
the 4.3 integration branch while of course verifying that all 
tests pass?
Feb 15 2013
next sibling parent reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
On Friday, 15 February 2013 at 18:41:42 UTC, Sebastian Graf wrote:

 I'd like to give the test suite a shot. Which branch of SWT's 
 git repository should I port? One of the 3.4 versions, 4.2 or 
 even the 4.3 integration branch while of course verifying that 
 all tests pass?


And then again, which test framework should I use?
Since SWT uses JUnit, DUnit would make sense, depending on its 
maturity. Of course we are using D here, so your rspec unittest 
sugar would fit even better from my POV.
This is all just based on a quick search.
Feb 15 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-15 20:05, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 And then again, which test framework should I use?
 Since SWT uses JUnit, DUnit would make sense, depending on its maturity.
 Of course we are using D here, so your rspec unittest sugar would fit
 even better from my POV.
 This is all just based on a quick search.


Preferably the code should look as close to the original code as 
possible, so I guess that means something that looks like JUnit.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 15 2013
prev sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-15 19:41, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 I'd like to give the test suite a shot. Which branch of SWT's git
 repository should I port? One of the 3.4 versions, 4.2 or even the 4.3
 integration branch while of course verifying that all tests pass?


You should use the tag that the rest of the code is based on. That would 
be 3.449. The version is located at:

https://github.com/d-widget-toolkit/org.eclipse.swt.win32.win32.x86/blob/master/src/org/eclipse/swt/internal/Library.d

Pick the closest tag.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 15 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-15 22:44, Jacob Carlborg wrote:


 You should use the tag that the rest of the code is based on. That would
 be 3.449. The version is located at:


There is a tag called "v3449", there are also tags "v3449a" - "v3449d". 
I'm not sure which to pick.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 16 2013
parent reply "Sebastian Graf" <SebastianGraf t-online.de> writes:
On Saturday, 16 February 2013 at 12:57:30 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:

 There is a tag called "v3449", there are also tags "v3449a" - 
 "v3449d". I'm not sure which to pick.


Do I have to stay D1 compliant with the test suite? This would 
mean I have to port DUnit too...
Feb 16 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-16 20:21, Sebastian Graf wrote:


 Do I have to stay D1 compliant with the test suite? This would mean I
 have to port DUnit too...


I don't want anyone to bend over backwards to stay compatible with D1. 
But as long as there is no big issue in staying compilable I would like 
to us to stay compatible. One or two string mixins is not a big issue 
but if it will require significant work we can drop the D1 support.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 16 2013