• Bruno Medeiros (31/31) Apr 29 2011 DDT 0.4.2 has been released.
• Tom (3/32) May 03 2011 Great news. Thanks!
• Jacob Carlborg (5/34) May 03 2011 BTW, is there a page, or similar, that compare DDT and Descent? Or if
• Bruno Medeiros (40/77) May 06 2011 There a few major differences (features implemented in one IDE, but not
• Jacob Carlborg (7/85) May 06 2011 Ok, thanks for the list. I was wondering if it's time to try DDT instead...
• Bruno Medeiros (9/14) May 06 2011 As you can see DDT is less featured, but it should be /fairly/ better in...
• Ary Manzana (10/88) May 06 2011 For the debugger, you can check out Descent code. I think you should be
• Jacob Carlborg (5/8) May 06 2011 Descent was a great IDE but I can see why you quit. It's to hard and
• Bruno Medeiros (5/10) May 10 2011 Yeah, I know, and I'll definitely look at Descent code when working the

Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:

DDT 0.4.2 has been released.

Software Update Site: http://ddt.eclipselabs.org.codespot.com/hg.updates/

Changelog:

== DDT 0.4.2 (2011-04-29) ==

DMD response file resolve to quote escaped values.
  * Fixed bug where all D comments where considered DDoc comments for 
documentation hover.
  * Fixed limitation where problem hovers where not more prioritary than 
documentation hovers.


very long to show up when many completion options are available)
  * Added support for editor code templates in Content Assist.
  * Fixed bug in cast expression, where the cast type reference was 
ignored by the parser/semantic-engine;
  * Fixed bug where DDoc comments where not associated with the 
corresponding symbol definition if that definition had protection, 
storage, linkage, or certain other kinds of attributes;

     * Added (nothrow, pure, shared, immutable) keywords to syntax coloring
     * Added  annotations to syntax coloring (spaces after   not 
supported, any identifier accepted)
     * Changed syntax coloring example in preferences
  * Fixed minor Content Assist bug where completions would not appear 
when requested on certain syntax errors.


Also I've chosen to move the DDT discussion forum from the DSource 
forums to a Google Groups:
http://groups.google.com/group/ddt-ide


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer

Tom <tom nospam.com> writes:

Great news. Thanks!

Tom;

El 29/04/2011 13:55, Bruno Medeiros escribió:
 DDT 0.4.2 has been released.

 Software Update Site: http://ddt.eclipselabs.org.codespot.com/hg.updates/

 Changelog:

 == DDT 0.4.2 (2011-04-29) ==

 DMD response file resolve to quote escaped values.
 * Fixed bug where all D comments where considered DDoc comments for
 documentation hover.
 * Fixed limitation where problem hovers where not more prioritary than
 documentation hovers.


 very long to show up when many completion options are available)
 * Added support for editor code templates in Content Assist.
 * Fixed bug in cast expression, where the cast type reference was
 ignored by the parser/semantic-engine;
 * Fixed bug where DDoc comments where not associated with the
 corresponding symbol definition if that definition had protection,
 storage, linkage, or certain other kinds of attributes;

 * Added (nothrow, pure, shared, immutable) keywords to syntax coloring
 * Added  annotations to syntax coloring (spaces after   not supported,
 any identifier accepted)
 * Changed syntax coloring example in preferences
 * Fixed minor Content Assist bug where completions would not appear when
 requested on certain syntax errors.


 Also I've chosen to move the DDT discussion forum from the DSource
 forums to a Google Groups:
 http://groups.google.com/group/ddt-ide

Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:

On 2011-04-29 18:55, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
 DDT 0.4.2 has been released.

 Software Update Site: http://ddt.eclipselabs.org.codespot.com/hg.updates/

 Changelog:

 == DDT 0.4.2 (2011-04-29) ==

 DMD response file resolve to quote escaped values.
 * Fixed bug where all D comments where considered DDoc comments for
 documentation hover.
 * Fixed limitation where problem hovers where not more prioritary than
 documentation hovers.


 very long to show up when many completion options are available)
 * Added support for editor code templates in Content Assist.
 * Fixed bug in cast expression, where the cast type reference was
 ignored by the parser/semantic-engine;
 * Fixed bug where DDoc comments where not associated with the
 corresponding symbol definition if that definition had protection,
 storage, linkage, or certain other kinds of attributes;

 * Added (nothrow, pure, shared, immutable) keywords to syntax coloring
 * Added  annotations to syntax coloring (spaces after   not supported,
 any identifier accepted)
 * Changed syntax coloring example in preferences
 * Fixed minor Content Assist bug where completions would not appear when
 requested on certain syntax errors.


 Also I've chosen to move the DDT discussion forum from the DSource
 forums to a Google Groups:
 http://groups.google.com/group/ddt-ide

BTW, is there a page, or similar, that compare DDT and Descent? Or if 
you could do a quick listing of the differences.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:

On 04/05/2011 07:55, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
 On 2011-04-29 18:55, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
 DDT 0.4.2 has been released.

 Software Update Site: http://ddt.eclipselabs.org.codespot.com/hg.updates/

 Changelog:

 == DDT 0.4.2 (2011-04-29) ==

 DMD response file resolve to quote escaped values.
 * Fixed bug where all D comments where considered DDoc comments for
 documentation hover.
 * Fixed limitation where problem hovers where not more prioritary than
 documentation hovers.


 very long to show up when many completion options are available)
 * Added support for editor code templates in Content Assist.
 * Fixed bug in cast expression, where the cast type reference was
 ignored by the parser/semantic-engine;
 * Fixed bug where DDoc comments where not associated with the
 corresponding symbol definition if that definition had protection,
 storage, linkage, or certain other kinds of attributes;

 * Added (nothrow, pure, shared, immutable) keywords to syntax coloring
 * Added  annotations to syntax coloring (spaces after   not supported,
 any identifier accepted)
 * Changed syntax coloring example in preferences
 * Fixed minor Content Assist bug where completions would not appear when
 requested on certain syntax errors.


 Also I've chosen to move the DDT discussion forum from the DSource
 forums to a Google Groups:
 http://groups.google.com/group/ddt-ide

 BTW, is there a page, or similar, that compare DDT and Descent? Or if
 you could do a quick listing of the differences.

There a few major differences (features implemented in one IDE, but not 
the other), and many minor/finer-grained differences (same overall 
feature but with different quality, stability, etc.) which actually do 
add up.

You can look at the features page for both:
http://code.google.com/a/eclipselabs.org/p/ddt/wiki/Features
http://www.dsource.org/projects/descent

although it may not give a complete picture, especially with regards to 
the minor details. From what I can see and remember, the differences are 
something like this:

Descent has:
* debugger integration (ddbg and GDC)
* in-editor, as-you-type, semantic error reporting (DDT reports syntax 
errors only)
* formatter (seems to work quite well)
* type hierarchy
* Some compile-time function evaluation/debugging (seems a bit brittle 
though)
* TODO/FIXME/XXX tasks tags. (this should be coming soon to DDT)

DDT has:
* integrated builder (a simple one though, delegates to another tool)
* search for references (the inverse of find declaration)

There some other minor differences. Descent has better icon/decoration 
support, wizards for creating new classes/modules, and other things I 
don't remember. Then there is code completion (aka Content Assist) which 
both IDEs support, but the quality varies a lot. Descent's is generally 
smarter and works in more contexts, and supports completing function 
calls (IIRC), but is very brittle and more unstable, and very tied to a 
specific D version (the latest one being D2 as of 1-2 years ago, I think).


PS:
I want to soon add debugger integration to DDT as well, as that is a 
very nice feature to have, but I have been caught up in other dev 
tasks/features (mostly more DLTK integration). These tasks are not as 
important to the IDE user as debugging, but it is important to me as a 
contributor to finish them first (because there is still DLTK 2.0 
functionality I haven't extended/finished, yet DLTK 3.0 is already 
coming next month, with Eclipse 3.7 (Indigo), and I'm trying to keep up).

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer

Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:

On 2011-05-06 13:52, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
 On 04/05/2011 07:55, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
 On 2011-04-29 18:55, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
 DDT 0.4.2 has been released.

 Software Update Site:
 http://ddt.eclipselabs.org.codespot.com/hg.updates/

 Changelog:

 == DDT 0.4.2 (2011-04-29) ==

 DMD response file resolve to quote escaped values.
 * Fixed bug where all D comments where considered DDoc comments for
 documentation hover.
 * Fixed limitation where problem hovers where not more prioritary than
 documentation hovers.


 very long to show up when many completion options are available)
 * Added support for editor code templates in Content Assist.
 * Fixed bug in cast expression, where the cast type reference was
 ignored by the parser/semantic-engine;
 * Fixed bug where DDoc comments where not associated with the
 corresponding symbol definition if that definition had protection,
 storage, linkage, or certain other kinds of attributes;

 * Added (nothrow, pure, shared, immutable) keywords to syntax coloring
 * Added  annotations to syntax coloring (spaces after   not supported,
 any identifier accepted)
 * Changed syntax coloring example in preferences
 * Fixed minor Content Assist bug where completions would not appear when
 requested on certain syntax errors.


 Also I've chosen to move the DDT discussion forum from the DSource
 forums to a Google Groups:
 http://groups.google.com/group/ddt-ide

 BTW, is there a page, or similar, that compare DDT and Descent? Or if
 you could do a quick listing of the differences.

 There a few major differences (features implemented in one IDE, but not
 the other), and many minor/finer-grained differences (same overall
 feature but with different quality, stability, etc.) which actually do
 add up.

 You can look at the features page for both:
 http://code.google.com/a/eclipselabs.org/p/ddt/wiki/Features
 http://www.dsource.org/projects/descent

 although it may not give a complete picture, especially with regards to
 the minor details. From what I can see and remember, the differences are
 something like this:

 Descent has:
 * debugger integration (ddbg and GDC)
 * in-editor, as-you-type, semantic error reporting (DDT reports syntax
 errors only)
 * formatter (seems to work quite well)
 * type hierarchy
 * Some compile-time function evaluation/debugging (seems a bit brittle
 though)
 * TODO/FIXME/XXX tasks tags. (this should be coming soon to DDT)

 DDT has:
 * integrated builder (a simple one though, delegates to another tool)
 * search for references (the inverse of find declaration)

 There some other minor differences. Descent has better icon/decoration
 support, wizards for creating new classes/modules, and other things I
 don't remember. Then there is code completion (aka Content Assist) which
 both IDEs support, but the quality varies a lot. Descent's is generally
 smarter and works in more contexts, and supports completing function
 calls (IIRC), but is very brittle and more unstable, and very tied to a
 specific D version (the latest one being D2 as of 1-2 years ago, I think).


 PS:
 I want to soon add debugger integration to DDT as well, as that is a
 very nice feature to have, but I have been caught up in other dev
 tasks/features (mostly more DLTK integration). These tasks are not as
 important to the IDE user as debugging, but it is important to me as a
 contributor to finish them first (because there is still DLTK 2.0
 functionality I haven't extended/finished, yet DLTK 3.0 is already
 coming next month, with Eclipse 3.7 (Indigo), and I'm trying to keep up).

Ok, thanks for the list. I was wondering if it's time to try DDT instead 
of Descent. I've basically given up on Descent, too slow and buggy. 
Content assist is very nice but isn't not worth it if it takes 5-10 
seconds to complete, and that is when eclipse doesn't freeze completely.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:

On 06/05/2011 13:52, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
 On 2011-05-06 13:52, Bruno Medeiros wrote:

 Ok, thanks for the list. I was wondering if it's time to try DDT instead
 of Descent. I've basically given up on Descent, too slow and buggy.
 Content assist is very nice but isn't not worth it if it takes 5-10
 seconds to complete, and that is when eclipse doesn't freeze completely.

As you can see DDT is less featured, but it should be /fairly/ better in 
terms of performance and stability (especially with stuff like 
http://code.google.com/a/eclipselabs.org/p/ddt/issues/detail?id=38 
fixed). But I haven't been working on large (or even medium-sized) D 
projects to know for sure. It would be nice to hear the opinion of 
others who have extensively tried either IDEs.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer

Ary Manzana <ary esperanto.org.ar> writes:

On 5/6/11 7:52 PM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
 On 04/05/2011 07:55, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
 On 2011-04-29 18:55, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
 DDT 0.4.2 has been released.

 Software Update Site:
 http://ddt.eclipselabs.org.codespot.com/hg.updates/

 Changelog:

 == DDT 0.4.2 (2011-04-29) ==

 DMD response file resolve to quote escaped values.
 * Fixed bug where all D comments where considered DDoc comments for
 documentation hover.
 * Fixed limitation where problem hovers where not more prioritary than
 documentation hovers.


 very long to show up when many completion options are available)
 * Added support for editor code templates in Content Assist.
 * Fixed bug in cast expression, where the cast type reference was
 ignored by the parser/semantic-engine;
 * Fixed bug where DDoc comments where not associated with the
 corresponding symbol definition if that definition had protection,
 storage, linkage, or certain other kinds of attributes;

 * Added (nothrow, pure, shared, immutable) keywords to syntax coloring
 * Added  annotations to syntax coloring (spaces after   not supported,
 any identifier accepted)
 * Changed syntax coloring example in preferences
 * Fixed minor Content Assist bug where completions would not appear when
 requested on certain syntax errors.


 Also I've chosen to move the DDT discussion forum from the DSource
 forums to a Google Groups:
 http://groups.google.com/group/ddt-ide

 BTW, is there a page, or similar, that compare DDT and Descent? Or if
 you could do a quick listing of the differences.

 There a few major differences (features implemented in one IDE, but not
 the other), and many minor/finer-grained differences (same overall
 feature but with different quality, stability, etc.) which actually do
 add up.

 You can look at the features page for both:
 http://code.google.com/a/eclipselabs.org/p/ddt/wiki/Features
 http://www.dsource.org/projects/descent

 although it may not give a complete picture, especially with regards to
 the minor details. From what I can see and remember, the differences are
 something like this:

 Descent has:
 * debugger integration (ddbg and GDC)
 * in-editor, as-you-type, semantic error reporting (DDT reports syntax
 errors only)
 * formatter (seems to work quite well)
 * type hierarchy
 * Some compile-time function evaluation/debugging (seems a bit brittle
 though)
 * TODO/FIXME/XXX tasks tags. (this should be coming soon to DDT)

   * Descent is not developed anymore :-P

 DDT has:
 * integrated builder (a simple one though, delegates to another tool)
 * search for references (the inverse of find declaration)

 There some other minor differences. Descent has better icon/decoration
 support, wizards for creating new classes/modules, and other things I
 don't remember. Then there is code completion (aka Content Assist) which
 both IDEs support, but the quality varies a lot. Descent's is generally
 smarter and works in more contexts, and supports completing function
 calls (IIRC), but is very brittle and more unstable, and very tied to a
 specific D version (the latest one being D2 as of 1-2 years ago, I think).


 PS:
 I want to soon add debugger integration to DDT as well, as that is a
 very nice feature to have, but I have been caught up in other dev
 tasks/features (mostly more DLTK integration). These tasks are not as
 important to the IDE user as debugging, but it is important to me as a
 contributor to finish them first (because there is still DLTK 2.0
 functionality I haven't extended/finished, yet DLTK 3.0 is already
 coming next month, with Eclipse 3.7 (Indigo), and I'm trying to keep up).

For the debugger, you can check out Descent code. I think you should be 
able to use most of it, it was made from scratch and almost without 
using any of the copied JDT logic. It made a front-end for gdb and ddbg 
(IIRC the name), so you should be able to implement the interfaces just 
fine to support another debugger.

Descent was too an ambitious project and coupled with the way D evolves 
(which I don't quite like, but I'm not developing my own language 
either, so...) made me quit it.

Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:

On 2011-05-06 16:36, Ary Manzana wrote:
 Descent was too an ambitious project and coupled with the way D evolves
 (which I don't quite like, but I'm not developing my own language
 either, so...) made me quit it.

Descent was a great IDE but I can see why you quit. It's to hard and 
takes to much time to keep up with the changes to the language.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:

On 06/05/2011 15:36, Ary Manzana wrote:
 For the debugger, you can check out Descent code. I think you should be
 able to use most of it, it was made from scratch and almost without
 using any of the copied JDT logic. It made a front-end for gdb and ddbg
 (IIRC the name), so you should be able to implement the interfaces just
 fine to support another debugger.

Yeah, I know, and I'll definitely look at Descent code when working the 
debugger functionality, but I just haven't got to that task yet.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer