• Georg Wrede (12/12) Mar 04 2009 The one at http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/rdmd.html has the following
• Andrei Alexandrescu (24/38) Mar 04 2009 Yah, I changed it to:
• Daniel Keep (11/18) Mar 04 2009 Not under Windows. It waits until you're out of hard drive space, and
• Georg Wrede (10/16) Mar 04 2009 The "original" rdmd saved files in ~/.rdmd and naturally had to manage
• Walter Bright (4/7) Mar 04 2009 It is the way it is because it is the most straightforward possible

Georg Wrede <georg.wrede iki.fi> writes:

The one at http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/rdmd.html has the following 
code:

int eval(string todo)
{
     auto progname = tmpDir~"/eval.d";
     std.file.write(progname, todo);
     scope(exit) std.file.remove(progname);
     run("dmd -run " ~ progname);
     return 0;
}

I think this is a problem when there are several users.
Probably eval.d could be in a directory with a temporary name.

Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:

Georg Wrede wrote:
 The one at http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/rdmd.html has the following 
 code:
 
 int eval(string todo)
 {
     auto progname = tmpDir~"/eval.d";
     std.file.write(progname, todo);
     scope(exit) std.file.remove(progname);
     run("dmd -run " ~ progname);
     return 0;
 }
 
 I think this is a problem when there are several users.
 Probably eval.d could be in a directory with a temporary name.

Yah, I changed it to:

int eval(string todo)
{
     MD5_CTX context;
     context.start();
     context.update(todo);
     ubyte digest[16];
     context.finish(digest);
     auto progname = std.path.join(tmpDir,
             "rdmd_eval" ~ digestToString(digest) ~ ".d");

     std.file.write(progname, todo);
     scope(exit) std.file.remove(progname);
     run("dmd -run " ~ progname);
     return 0;
}

By the way, md5 is so tedious to use. Five lines!! Should be one line to 
get a digest string. It's like, "let's see how to define an API that 
would take the most lines of code possible to use". Sigh.

Anyway, now with md5 in place I can reuse the executable filename such 
that successive calls to e.g. rdmd --eval "writeln(1 + 1)" do not 
compile anything. Can I assume the tmp directory will get cleaned in 
reasonable time by the system on both Windows and Unix?


Andrei

Daniel Keep <daniel.keep.lists gmail.com> writes:

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 [...]
 
 Can I assume the tmp directory will get cleaned in
 reasonable time by the system on both Windows and Unix?
 
 
 Andrei

Not under Windows.  It waits until you're out of hard drive space, and
then it pops up a wizard that says "You're out of disk space; please
wait while I compute your savings!".

Usually, it then comes back and tells you "you can free 0 MB" because
you ran it yesterday and it's too stupid to remember.

Sometimes, I wonder if there isn't someone at Microsoft whose job it is
to come up with the single most effective way to aggravate users.  *sigh*

But yeah, in so far as I know, you'll have to manually manage the temp
file cache.

  -- Daniel

Georg Wrede <georg.wrede iki.fi> writes:

Daniel Keep wrote:
 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 Can I assume the tmp directory will get cleaned in
 reasonable time by the system on both Windows and Unix?


 But yeah, in so far as I know, you'll have to manually manage the temp
 file cache.

The "original" rdmd saved files in ~/.rdmd and naturally had to manage 
the file cache itself.

My solution was to on each run check for old files and delete them. Any 
binary not used in six months got nuked. And any other kind of file got 
nuked if it had not been looked at in the last half hour.

The latter made debugging and tweaking very easy.

For example, to implement rdmd shebang for files not ending in .d I 
copied the original text file into ~/.rdmd with a .d suffix, and 
compiled it there. Also a copy of compiler error output was stored there.

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 By the way, md5 is so tedious to use. Five lines!! Should be one line to 
 get a digest string. It's like, "let's see how to define an API that 
 would take the most lines of code possible to use". Sigh.

It is the way it is because it is the most straightforward possible 
translation of the RFC C code. This means that someone using the RFC C 
code would have no trouble translating their code to D.