torhu wrote:
> Christian Kamm wrote:
>> I didn't see anything about AA literals in the changelog though - when  have they been added?
> 
> There was some code added in 1.012, some in 1.013 (some of us are sick enough to actually diff the source).  They're probably not announced yet because there are some basics missing, like allowing strings for keys.

I think it'd good to post about them anyway, though. .stringof was never announced, yet it's been in the compilers for a while and even made it to the spec.

-- 
Remove ".doesnotlike.spam" from the mail address.

"torhu" <fake@address.dude> wrote in message news:f0b8qq$2vjm$1@digitalmars.com...
> Christian Kamm wrote:
>> I didn't see anything about AA literals in the changelog though - when have they been added?
>
> There was some code added in 1.012, some in 1.013 (some of us are sick enough to actually diff the source).

Hehe, me too. I add each new DMD to a local SVN, so I can check the changes (with the changelog at hand, it's a very good way to learn compiler internals!) and it makes it easy to test code with older versions of DMD. Highly recommended!

L.

Lionello Lunesu wrote:

>> There was some code added in 1.012, some in 1.013 (some of us are sick enough to actually diff the source).
> 
> Hehe, me too. I add each new DMD to a local SVN, so I can check the changes (with the changelog at hand, it's a very good way to learn compiler internals!) and it makes it easy to test code with older versions of DMD. 

It's also a good way to track changes needed for porting over to GDC...
I have a set of diffs going at http://gdcmac.sourceforge.net/diffs/,
that you can view if you don't feel like downloading/diffing yourself.
(divided into changes to front-end source "src" and to spec/docs "html")

Even better would be an official public DMD source code repository ?
Like the one GDC has: http://dgcc.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/dgcc/

--anders

I downloaded the 1.013 release but when i execute dmd.exe on a winxp commandline shell, it says it's version 1.010. Or am I missing something?

negerns

ricky wrote:
> I downloaded the 1.013 release but when i execute dmd.exe on a winxp commandline shell, it says it's version 1.010. Or am I missing something?

It should say 1.013.

You either unzipped 1.013 to the wrong place or you have a different 1.010 installed somewhere else that comes first on your path.



--bb

Bill Baxter wrote:
> ricky wrote:
>> I downloaded the 1.013 release but when i execute dmd.exe on a winxp
>> commandline shell, it says it's version 1.010. Or am I missing something?
>
> It should say 1.013.
>
> You either unzipped 1.013 to the wrong place or you have a different
> 1.010 installed somewhere else that comes first on your path.
>
> --bb

I've downloaded the latest from the ftp site and extracted it on my c:\ path and another path. It still says it's version 1.010. I also noticed that the dates of the files dmd and dmd.exe are dated 03/26/07 and 03/25/07 respectively. I also removed my path reference to c:\dmd\bin and checked.

I've downloaded releases prior to 1.0 but this is the first time i've encountered this. What else could be wrong?

negerns

ricky wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>  > ricky wrote:
>  >> I downloaded the 1.013 release but when i execute dmd.exe on a winxp
>  >> commandline shell, it says it's version 1.010. Or am I missing something?
>  >
>  > It should say 1.013.
>  >
>  > You either unzipped 1.013 to the wrong place or you have a different
>  > 1.010 installed somewhere else that comes first on your path.
>  >
>  > --bb
> 
> I've downloaded the latest from the ftp site and extracted it on my c:\ path and another path. It still says it's version 1.010. I also noticed that the dates of the files dmd and dmd.exe are dated 03/26/07 and 03/25/07 respectively. I also removed my path reference to c:\dmd\bin and checked.
> 
> I've downloaded releases prior to 1.0 but this is the first time i've encountered this. What else could be wrong?

You should download the file with the explicit version number (dmd.1.013.zip) not dmd.zip. The latter has been put back to 1.010 due to problems with 1.011 & 1.012 (IIRC they were fixed in 1.013 though).

ricky wrote:
> I downloaded the 1.013 release but when i execute dmd.exe on a winxp commandline shell, it says it's version 1.010. Or am I missing something?

Use this download link:

http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.013.zip

Walter Bright wrote:
> ricky wrote:
>> I downloaded the 1.013 release but when i execute dmd.exe on a winxp commandline shell, it says it's version 1.010. Or am I missing something?
> 
> Use this download link:
> 
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.013.zip

This is Reason Number 1 why the handy dmd.zip link is a bad idea.

<quote voice="Forrest Gump">
  My momma always said, "dmd.zip was like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get."
</quote>

--bb

Reply to Bill,

> Walter Bright wrote:
> 
>> ricky wrote:
>> 
>>> I downloaded the 1.013 release but when i execute dmd.exe on a winxp
>>> commandline shell, it says it's version 1.010. Or am I missing
>>> something?
>>> 
>> Use this download link:
>> 
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.013.zip
>> 
> This is Reason Number 1 why the handy dmd.zip link is a bad idea.
> 
> <quote voice="Forrest Gump">
> My momma always said, "dmd.zip was like a box of chocolates. You
> never know what you're gonna get."
> </quote>
> 
> --bb
> 

I think that dmd.zip == dmd.1.010.zip is not a mistake. the idea is that dmd.zip is a "last stable version" link.