• Rufus Smith (6/6) Jul 22 2016 Trying to compile code that uses GDC, had to import phobos files
• Lodovico Giaretta (6/12) Jul 22 2016 The peculiarity of this code is that it uses DIP 25.
• Lodovico Giaretta (9/15) Jul 22 2016 I'll add that, in general, it's a bad idea to mix the libraries
• Rufus Smith (18/37) Jul 22 2016 I don't agree with this. The versions are too far out of sync. It
• Lodovico Giaretta (7/47) Jul 22 2016 LDC is fairly up to date. In fact, it recently shipped an alpha

Rufus Smith <RufusSmith indi.com> writes:

Trying to compile code that uses GDC, had to import phobos files 
from dmd in to project since they are not in the GDC's phobo 
lib(the core.sys.windows stuff).

Almost all the errors are related to stuff like

PALETTEENTRY* peNew() return { return _peNew.ptr; }


Does that even make sense?

Lodovico Giaretta <lodovico giaretart.net> writes:

On Friday, 22 July 2016 at 18:30:13 UTC, Rufus Smith wrote:
 Trying to compile code that uses GDC, had to import phobos 
 files from dmd in to project since they are not in the GDC's 
 phobo lib(the core.sys.windows stuff).

 Almost all the errors are related to stuff like

 PALETTEENTRY* peNew() return { return _peNew.ptr; }


 Does that even make sense?

The peculiarity of this code is that it uses DIP 25.
I don't know if GDC supports it, nor if you need some compiler 
switch.
In DMD you need the -dip25 switch.

For more infos on DIP 25: https://wiki.dlang.org/DIP25

Lodovico Giaretta <lodovico giaretart.net> writes:

On Friday, 22 July 2016 at 18:30:13 UTC, Rufus Smith wrote:
 Trying to compile code that uses GDC, had to import phobos 
 files from dmd in to project since they are not in the GDC's 
 phobo lib(the core.sys.windows stuff).

 Almost all the errors are related to stuff like

 PALETTEENTRY* peNew() return { return _peNew.ptr; }


 Does that even make sense?

I'll add that, in general, it's a bad idea to mix the libraries 
of the various compilers. In fact, the library has the same 
release cycle as the frontend, and is specific to the frontend 
version it comes with. GDC is several frontend versions behind 
DMD, so GDC cannot support the new features / characteristics of 
the recent DMD libraries.
You should always use a Phobos version as old as the frontend of 
the compiler you're using.

Rufus Smith <RufusSmith indi.com> writes:

On Friday, 22 July 2016 at 19:52:59 UTC, Lodovico Giaretta wrote:
 On Friday, 22 July 2016 at 18:30:13 UTC, Rufus Smith wrote:
 Trying to compile code that uses GDC, had to import phobos 
 files from dmd in to project since they are not in the GDC's 
 phobo lib(the core.sys.windows stuff).

 Almost all the errors are related to stuff like

 PALETTEENTRY* peNew() return { return _peNew.ptr; }


 Does that even make sense?

 I'll add that, in general, it's a bad idea to mix the libraries 
 of the various compilers. In fact, the library has the same 
 release cycle as the frontend, and is specific to the frontend 
 version it comes with. GDC is several frontend versions behind 
 DMD, so GDC cannot support the new features / characteristics 
 of the recent DMD libraries.
 You should always use a Phobos version as old as the frontend 
 of the compiler you're using.

I don't agree with this. The versions are too far out of sync. It 
is better to test the different versions together because they 
are not consistent. As I yet I can neither use GDC or LDC because 
they don't compile the code that works with DMD. This is a 
problem with those compilers. If one could guarantee that the 
oldest compiler was always compatible, eventually(reasonably), 
with the newest one, it would be a different story. But bugs 
creep in. I'd rather work with the reference compiler, the actual 
one the language is based off of, rather than work with one that 
is not even guaranteed to be maintained properly.

With dmd, I know exactly what I'm getting and I only bother with 
the other compilers due to performance, which is not priority 
when developing. Hence, I hope that the other compilers are up to 
speed once I am finished with developing. This is a risk, but no 
more than expecting those compilers to eventually be updated. 
Given that the maintenance of LDC and GDC are rather low compared 
to DMD, I'd rather stick with DMD.

Lodovico Giaretta <lodovico giaretart.net> writes:

On Friday, 22 July 2016 at 20:26:50 UTC, Rufus Smith wrote:
 On Friday, 22 July 2016 at 19:52:59 UTC, Lodovico Giaretta 
 wrote:
 On Friday, 22 July 2016 at 18:30:13 UTC, Rufus Smith wrote:
 Trying to compile code that uses GDC, had to import phobos 
 files from dmd in to project since they are not in the GDC's 
 phobo lib(the core.sys.windows stuff).

 Almost all the errors are related to stuff like

 PALETTEENTRY* peNew() return { return _peNew.ptr; }


 Does that even make sense?

 I'll add that, in general, it's a bad idea to mix the 
 libraries of the various compilers. In fact, the library has 
 the same release cycle as the frontend, and is specific to the 
 frontend version it comes with. GDC is several frontend 
 versions behind DMD, so GDC cannot support the new features / 
 characteristics of the recent DMD libraries.
 You should always use a Phobos version as old as the frontend 
 of the compiler you're using.

 I don't agree with this. The versions are too far out of sync. 
 It is better to test the different versions together because 
 they are not consistent. As I yet I can neither use GDC or LDC 
 because they don't compile the code that works with DMD. This 
 is a problem with those compilers. If one could guarantee that 
 the oldest compiler was always compatible, 
 eventually(reasonably), with the newest one, it would be a 
 different story. But bugs creep in. I'd rather work with the 
 reference compiler, the actual one the language is based off 
 of, rather than work with one that is not even guaranteed to be 
 maintained properly.

 With dmd, I know exactly what I'm getting and I only bother 
 with the other compilers due to performance, which is not 
 priority when developing. Hence, I hope that the other 
 compilers are up to speed once I am finished with developing. 
 This is a risk, but no more than expecting those compilers to 
 eventually be updated. Given that the maintenance of LDC and 
 GDC are rather low compared to DMD, I'd rather stick with DMD.

LDC is fairly up to date. In fact, it recently shipped an alpha 
version with support for the 2.071 frontend, while DMD 2.072 is 
still in beta. So, not that bad, just one version behind. I 
started a project a couple months ago with DMD 2.071. I'm still 
working on it, and now I can also use LDC.
The real problem is GDC, which apparently is currently at 2.066.