On 8/22/17 1:15 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 8/22/2017 8:14 AM, Jonathan Shamir wrote:
>> https://dlang.org/htod.html
>>
>> I click download and get an exe!
>>
>> And in the bugs section:
>> No linux version.
>>
>> I'll start with the productive part. If anyone can point me out to the sources of htod I would love to compile for linux + osx. Any task seems more attractive to me than manually converting a 1000 line header to D.
> 
> You're right about htod, and it's on me. It's built out of the DMC++ front end. I haven't gotten around yet to releasing it as open source.

I downloaded it. The exe is last modified April 28, 2010, corresponding with DMD version 2.044.

This can't possibly produce valid D headers for 2.075.1. I think it should be either updated or removed from the web site.

-Steve

Am 22.08.2017 um 17:14 schrieb Jonathan Shamir:
> The DUB package repository is horrible! More often than not, the packages are so poorly written I end up just writing my own implementation. Adding the ability to "rate" packages would go a long way in improving the situation.

We are working on this point. There will be some form of popularity and quality measures, as well as top lists to discover notable projects.

On 2017-08-22 19:47, 12345swordy wrote:

> Use Clang frontend?

DStep [1] is doing that. It handles both GCC and Microsoft extensions.

[1] https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/dstep

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 8/22/2017 11:23 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> I downloaded it. The exe is last modified April 28, 2010, corresponding with DMD version 2.044.
> 
> This can't possibly produce valid D headers for 2.075.1. I think it should be either updated or removed from the web site.

It doesn't correspond to the D version, it corresponds to the C compiler version, which is stable.

On 8/22/17 5:17 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 8/22/2017 11:23 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> I downloaded it. The exe is last modified April 28, 2010, corresponding with DMD version 2.044.
>>
>> This can't possibly produce valid D headers for 2.075.1. I think it should be either updated or removed from the web site.
> 
> It doesn't correspond to the D version, it corresponds to the C compiler version, which is stable.

But it is generating D code, no?

-Steve

On 8/22/2017 2:50 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 8/22/17 5:17 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 8/22/2017 11:23 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>> I downloaded it. The exe is last modified April 28, 2010, corresponding with DMD version 2.044.
>>>
>>> This can't possibly produce valid D headers for 2.075.1. I think it should be either updated or removed from the web site.
>>
>> It doesn't correspond to the D version, it corresponds to the C compiler version, which is stable.
> 
> But it is generating D code, no?

Sure. And the C subset of D has been very stable, too.

On Tuesday, 22 August 2017 at 22:50:46 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 8/22/2017 2:50 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> But it is generating D code, no?
>
> Sure. And the C subset of D has been very stable, too.

Used the tool 2 years ago. Worked like a charm.

On Tuesday, 22 August 2017 at 19:55:53 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2017-08-22 19:47, 12345swordy wrote:
>
>> Use Clang frontend?
>
> DStep [1] is doing that. It handles both GCC and Microsoft extensions.
>
> [1] https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/dstep

"Doesn't translate C++ at all"

That's very disappointing. IMO, it should at least aim for the c++ 11 feature via using clang.

On Wednesday, 23 August 2017 at 13:25:20 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>
> "Doesn't translate C++ at all"
>
> That's very disappointing. IMO, it should at least aim for the c++ 11 feature via using clang.

Very disappointing? It's not trivial to call C++ from another language.

> But lets be honest. If I was just interested to learn about this "modern system programming language" that is C++ done right, I would dismiss D very quickly. We need to get together as a community and rethink your priorities, because with problems like this we're making it very hard for newcomers to trust in this very poorly adapted language.
>
> Programming tools used by day to day programmers should be a priority. Because everyone expects valgrind to work.
>
> The standard library should be a priority. It's far from complete (hopefully my company will contribute in this respect in the near future).
>
> The DUB package repository is horrible! More often than not, the packages are so poorly written I end up just writing my own implementation. Adding the ability to "rate" packages would go a long way in improving the situation.
>
> I understand hacking the frontend is way more interesting to most of the community. But if we don't find the time to improve on our visibility and language maturity, D will never get the attention it deserves.

+1