www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - how about dem 64bits?

reply "dominik" <asd asd.com> writes:
dmd for 64bit, windows atleast, since gdc and windows is a no go - please!
Apr 13 2008
next sibling parent reply Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> writes:
dominik wrote:

 dmd for 64bit, windows atleast, since gdc and windows is a no go - please! 
 
 


Why is GDC a no-go on Windows? I've even compiled GDC itself on Vista 
x64 a while back. (But then I went back to 32-bit Vista, because I found 
64-bit Windows so freakin' schizophrenic.)

L.
Apr 13 2008
next sibling parent reply dominik <dominik vga.hr> writes:
Lionello Lunesu Wrote:

 Why is GDC a no-go on Windows? I've even compiled GDC itself on Vista 
 x64 a while back. (But then I went back to 32-bit Vista, because I found 
 64-bit Windows so freakin' schizophrenic.)


well, basically I haven't been able to install/compile gdc to use it on
windows. I tried, mignw and all, but without success. I have no experience with
gcc, so that is the problem I guess. It would be very very usefull if there
were some documented steps on how to compile/install and use mingw/gdc on
windows. :\
Apr 14 2008
parent reply "Lionello Lunesu" <lionello lunesu.remove.com> writes:
"dominik" <dominik vga.hr> wrote in message 
news:ftv966$2bdt$1 digitalmars.com...

 Lionello Lunesu Wrote:

 Why is GDC a no-go on Windows? I've even compiled GDC itself on Vista
 x64 a while back. (But then I went back to 32-bit Vista, because I found
 64-bit Windows so freakin' schizophrenic.)


 well, basically I haven't been able to install/compile gdc to use it on 
 windows. I tried, mignw and all, but without success. I have no experience 
 with gcc, so that is the problem I guess. It would be very very usefull if 
 there were some documented steps on how to compile/install and use 
 mingw/gdc on windows. :\


I never got mingw to work, but cygwin worked fine. Just make sure you 
install all needed headers/libraries to build GCC/GDC and it'll work, I 
promise ;)

L.
Apr 14 2008
parent reply dominik <dominik vga.hr> writes:
Lionello Lunesu Wrote:

 I never got mingw to work, but cygwin worked fine. Just make sure you 
 install all needed headers/libraries to build GCC/GDC and it'll work, I 
 promise ;)


So if I install cygwin and mingw I should be able to compile gcc/gdc then? I
don't wan't to make cygwin dependable executables though :\
Apr 14 2008
parent reply Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> writes:
dominik wrote:

 Lionello Lunesu Wrote:

 I never got mingw to work, but cygwin worked fine. Just make sure you 
 install all needed headers/libraries to build GCC/GDC and it'll work, I 
 promise ;)


 
 So if I install cygwin and mingw I should be able to compile gcc/gdc then? I
don't wan't to make cygwin dependable executables though :\


You don't need mingw if you have cygwin. At least, I just installed 
cygwin and that's all I needed.

I don't think the executables need cygwin, just GDC and GCC need cygwin.

L.
Apr 14 2008
next sibling parent dominik <dominik vga.hr> writes:
Lionello Lunesu Wrote:

 I don't think the executables need cygwin, just GDC and GCC need cygwin.


alright, thanks I will try it. Is there a specifical GCC toolchain version
which I should use with GDC or can I use the latest (4.3.0 I think it is)?
Apr 14 2008
prev sibling parent reply Tim Burrell <tim timburrell.net> writes:
Lionello Lunesu wrote:

 dominik wrote:

 Lionello Lunesu Wrote:

 I never got mingw to work, but cygwin worked fine. Just make sure you 
 install all needed headers/libraries to build GCC/GDC and it'll work, I 
 promise ;)


 
 So if I install cygwin and mingw I should be able to compile gcc/gdc then? I
don't wan't to make cygwin dependable executables though :\


 
 You don't need mingw if you have cygwin. At least, I just installed 
 cygwin and that's all I needed.
 
 I don't think the executables need cygwin, just GDC and GCC need cygwin.


This is the wrong way to go.  Cygwin compiled executables definitely 
need cygwin to run!  When you're running something under cygwin you're 
actually running an app that is using a windows port of the linux 
programming APIs.  If you compile an app using gcc under cygwin you're 
explicitly linking it to the cygwin environment.

Yeah you can still redistribute it, but you'll need to distribute the 
appropriate cygwin dll's and so forth along with your app.

mingw and gdc win (http://gdcwin.sourceforge.net/) are really what he 
wants.  I've been using mingw and gdcwin to create binary 
redistributable windows apps for some time now (yes with Tango), without 
any issues what-so-ever.

Dominik, if you have any specific problems, maybe we can help you sort 
them out.

Tim.
Apr 14 2008
next sibling parent reply dominik <dominik vga.hr> writes:
Tim Burrell Wrote:

 Dominik, if you have any specific problems, maybe we can help you sort 
 them out.


well the problem right now is that I don't know what I have to get and what I
have to do in order to have gdc (with Tango) on my windows box for both 32bit
and 64bit compilation. It is not imperative that I have both 32 and 64bit on
32bit box, I can have 32bit on 32bit OS and 64bit on 64bit OS, it doesn't
matter. I just can't find out what I have to download and how to
install/compile GDC by myself in order to use GDC on Windows, since I have no
experience with gcc.

Do I download mingw, do I also download MSYS, do I download them in binary or
in source, what then? What version of GCC is that then? Can I use latest gcc
somehow etc.. lots of questions :)
Apr 14 2008
parent reply e-t172 <e-t172 akegroup.org> writes:
dominik a écrit :

 Tim Burrell Wrote:

 Dominik, if you have any specific problems, maybe we can help you sort 
 them out.


 
 well the problem right now is that I don't know what I have to get and what I
have to do in order to have gdc (with Tango) on my windows box for both 32bit
and 64bit compilation. It is not imperative that I have both 32 and 64bit on
32bit box, I can have 32bit on 32bit OS and 64bit on 64bit OS, it doesn't
matter. I just can't find out what I have to download and how to
install/compile GDC by myself in order to use GDC on Windows, since I have no
experience with gcc.


Last time I checked, it was not possible to build 64-bit applications 
using MinGW. The MinGW developers are working on it though.

I don't think there is any way to output 64-bit code for Windows at the 
moment.
Apr 14 2008
next sibling parent reply Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> writes:
== Quote from e-t172 (e-t172 akegroup.org)'s article

 dominik a écrit :

 Tim Burrell Wrote:

 Dominik, if you have any specific problems, maybe we can help you sort
 them out.


 well the problem right now is that I don't know what I have to get and what I
have to do in order to




have gdc (with Tango) on my windows box for both 32bit and 64bit compilation.
It is not imperative
that I have both 32 and 64bit on 32bit box, I can have 32bit on 32bit OS and
64bit on 64bit OS, it
doesn't matter. I just can't find out what I have to download and how to
install/compile GDC by myself in
order to use GDC on Windows, since I have no experience with gcc.

 Last time I checked, it was not possible to build 64-bit applications
 using MinGW. The MinGW developers are working on it though.
 I don't think there is any way to output 64-bit code for Windows at the
 moment.


In theory, LLVMDC should be able to do this.  Here's the link:

http://www.dsource.org/projects/llvmdc

And frankly, given the slow progress of GDC recently, I'm starting to think
that it may be the preferred alternative D compiler anyway.  I'll be very
excited once it's production-quality.


Sean
Apr 14 2008
parent "dominik" <asd asd.com> writes:
"Sean Kelly" <sean invisibleduck.org> wrote in message 
news:fu053o$1e16$1 digitalmars.com...

 In theory, LLVMDC should be able to do this.  Here's the link:

 http://www.dsource.org/projects/llvmdc

 And frankly, given the slow progress of GDC recently, I'm starting to 
 think
 that it may be the preferred alternative D compiler anyway.  I'll be very
 excited once it's production-quality.


oh lots of work still to do there, oh damn all of the tickets are beyond my 
scope :|
Apr 14 2008
prev sibling parent "dominik" <asd asd.com> writes:
"e-t172" <e-t172 akegroup.org> wrote in message 
news:fu022q$17nh$1 digitalmars.com...

 I don't think there is any way to output 64-bit code for Windows at the 
 moment.


oh damn :|
Apr 14 2008
prev sibling parent "Anders Bergh" <anders1 gmail.com> writes:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Tim Burrell <tim timburrell.net> wrote:

  This is the wrong way to go.  Cygwin compiled executables definitely need
 cygwin to run!  When you're running something under cygwin you're actually
 running an app that is using a windows port of the linux programming APIs.
 If you compile an app using gcc under cygwin you're explicitly linking it to
 the cygwin environment.

  Yeah you can still redistribute it, but you'll need to distribute the
 appropriate cygwin dll's and so forth along with your app.

  mingw and gdc win (http://gdcwin.sourceforge.net/) are really what he
 wants.  I've been using mingw and gdcwin to create binary redistributable
 windows apps for some time now (yes with Tango), without any issues
 what-so-ever.

  Dominik, if you have any specific problems, maybe we can help you sort them
 out.

  Tim.


I believe you can pass -mno-cygwin to make it use the mingw stuff instead.

Anders
Apr 14 2008
prev sibling parent reply JMNorris <nospam nospam.com> writes:
Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> wrote in
news:ftu6ka$c98$1 digitalmars.com: 


 dominik wrote:

 dmd for 64bit, windows atleast, since gdc and windows is a no go -
 please! 
 
 


 
 Why is GDC a no-go on Windows? I've even compiled GDC itself on Vista 
 x64 a while back. (But then I went back to 32-bit Vista, because I
 found 64-bit Windows so freakin' schizophrenic.)
 
 L.
 


And 32-bit Vista isn't???  For my 32-bit Vista, a good day (and I don't 
have them often) is only  one unplug-the-computer-and-reboot session.

-- 
JMNorris
Apr 14 2008
parent reply "Lionello Lunesu" <lionello lunesu.remove.com> writes:
"JMNorris" <nospam nospam.com> wrote in message 
news:ftv9gt$2841$1 digitalmars.com...

 Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> wrote in
 news:ftu6ka$c98$1 digitalmars.com:


 dominik wrote:

 dmd for 64bit, windows atleast, since gdc and windows is a no go -
 please!


 Why is GDC a no-go on Windows? I've even compiled GDC itself on Vista
 x64 a while back. (But then I went back to 32-bit Vista, because I
 found 64-bit Windows so freakin' schizophrenic.)

 L.


 And 32-bit Vista isn't???  For my 32-bit Vista, a good day (and I don't
 have them often) is only  one unplug-the-computer-and-reboot session.


OK, this'll probably start a flame war, but I really think Vista's 
underrated. I like it a lot.

OTOH, all x64 Windows are f**ked up: two program files, two registries, two 
"system32" folders (I kid you not: the x64 one is still called like that). 
Two different explorers, so you'll have to install explorer plugins twice, 
both x32 and x64.. It's really impossible to maintain. Not to mention the 
numerous incompatibilities.

L.
Apr 14 2008
parent reply Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:
Lionello Lunesu wrote:

 
 "JMNorris" <nospam nospam.com> wrote in message 
 news:ftv9gt$2841$1 digitalmars.com...

 Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> wrote in
 news:ftu6ka$c98$1 digitalmars.com:


 dominik wrote:

 dmd for 64bit, windows atleast, since gdc and windows is a no go -
 please!


 Why is GDC a no-go on Windows? I've even compiled GDC itself on Vista
 x64 a while back. (But then I went back to 32-bit Vista, because I
 found 64-bit Windows so freakin' schizophrenic.)

 L.


 And 32-bit Vista isn't???  For my 32-bit Vista, a good day (and I don't
 have them often) is only  one unplug-the-computer-and-reboot session.


 
 OK, this'll probably start a flame war, but I really think Vista's 
 underrated. I like it a lot.


I think the problem with Vista is that just that Microsoft finally got
things right pretty much right at last with XP in terms of the OS.  It
was the first time Win95 and WinNT really were integrated.  And that was
a big deal.  This time all they've got to encourage people to switch is
glitz and hype.  That's not enough to impress the folks in corporate IT
centers with the big budgets.  XP works pretty darn well.  That's the
biggest problem with Vista.

--bb
Apr 14 2008
next sibling parent "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:
"Bill Baxter" <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> wrote in message 
news:ftvis4$2v9s$1 digitalmars.com...

 I think the problem with Vista is that just that Microsoft finally got
 things right pretty much right at last with XP in terms of the OS.  It
 was the first time Win95 and WinNT really were integrated.  And that was
 a big deal.  This time all they've got to encourage people to switch is
 glitz and hype.  That's not enough to impress the folks in corporate IT
 centers with the big budgets.  XP works pretty darn well.  That's the
 biggest problem with Vista.


Completely agreed.

I don't know if it's telling or not, but Windows 7 is possibly slated for 
release sometime in the next year 
(http://www.news.com/8301-13860_3-9911470-56.html).  Like the article says 
that might just be a developer release.  Even if it's not, it's supposed to 
come out in 2010 or so.  That seems terribly quick, and I'm not sure if it's 
just MS being MS or if they really realized what an unattractive OS Vista is 
for most people.
Apr 14 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
Bill Baxter wrote:

 I think the problem with Vista is that just that Microsoft finally got
 things right pretty much right at last with XP in terms of the OS.  It
 was the first time Win95 and WinNT really were integrated.  And that was
 a big deal.  This time all they've got to encourage people to switch is
 glitz and hype.  That's not enough to impress the folks in corporate IT
 centers with the big budgets.  XP works pretty darn well.  That's the
 biggest problem with Vista.
 
 --bb


No they didn't. The big thing that Vista adds that XP/Server 03 didn't
have is kernel security (and integrated OneCare, and that funny desktop
search thing, and...). For people who know how to use it right (for
example my dad just clicks accept on anything), it's a far more secure
solution than anything any other OS has.
Apr 14 2008
parent Yigal Chripun <yigal100 gmail.com> writes:
Robert Fraser wrote:

 Bill Baxter wrote:
   

 I think the problem with Vista is that just that Microsoft finally got
 things right pretty much right at last with XP in terms of the OS.  It
 was the first time Win95 and WinNT really were integrated.  And that was
 a big deal.  This time all they've got to encourage people to switch is
 glitz and hype.  That's not enough to impress the folks in corporate IT
 centers with the big budgets.  XP works pretty darn well.  That's the
 biggest problem with Vista.

 --bb
     


 No they didn't. The big thing that Vista adds that XP/Server 03 didn't
 have is kernel security (and integrated OneCare, and that funny desktop
 search thing, and...). For people who know how to use it right (for
 example my dad just clicks accept on anything), it's a far more secure
 solution than anything any other OS has.
   


you provide a counter-example for your own argument in your post.
Vista is _not_ a secure OS. on the contrary, most other OSes, including
ones who got extinct a decade ago provide more security than windows.
Would you consider your house secured if it had a door with a large lock
and a built-in key and a sign on it that said "Please do not enter if
you do not have permission to"?? What would stop a thief to just ignore
the sign and use the built-in key to steal your stuff? how is that
secure in your eyes?

*nix Oses and even OSes that were running on Mainframes in the 60's have
had a much *much* better security than the latest and best MS has to offer.

--Yigal

PS if you want real security at the kernel level than check out SElinux
for linux or even more advanced capability based micro-kernel approaches
such as coyotos or L4sec based on L4.
Apr 14 2008
prev sibling parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:
Bill Baxter wrote:

 
 I think the problem with Vista is that just that Microsoft finally got
 things right pretty much right at last with XP in terms of the OS.  It
 was the first time Win95 and WinNT really were integrated.  And that was
 a big deal.  This time all they've got to encourage people to switch is
 glitz and hype.  That's not enough to impress the folks in corporate IT
 centers with the big budgets.  XP works pretty darn well.  That's the
 biggest problem with Vista.
 
 --bb


Perhaps that "problem" is part of the point of Vista. People were eager
to upgrade to XP because the previous OSes sucked. So MS makes an OS
with lots more features and candy, but all in a way that sucks, so that
people become eager to upgrade to Windows 7, hehe. :P (nonetheless after
spending money on Vista).
So maybe it's all a clever marketing ploy. xD


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - MSc in CS/E student
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
Apr 25 2008
prev sibling parent Neal Becker <ndbecker2 gmail.com> writes:
dominik wrote:


 dmd for 64bit, windows atleast, since gdc and windows is a no go - please!


How about dmd 64 bit linux?  I'm still waiting for this.
Apr 14 2008