November 08, 2013
On 11/05/2013 11:08 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> Ok, this is it:
>
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.i386.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_i386.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2.exe
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.zip
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.dmg
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_i386.deb

Would you mind to update the rpms with a fixed build?
http://forum.dlang.org/post/527C3ED0.8030508@dawg.eu
November 08, 2013
On 2013-11-08 19:37, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

> The list of issues fixed were generated on October 20th, and that bug
> was not marked as fixed in bugzilla at the time. There's likely a set
> of additional bugs which are not listed in the changelog, but it's
> hard to both autogenerate these and then have to manually track which
> bugs were merged into the 2.064 branch. Everything is done ad-hoc, so
> you'll end up with this sort of problem.

Aha, I see. The documentation wasn't merged on October 20th so the issue hadn't got closed.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
November 08, 2013
On 2013-11-08 14:17, Dicebot wrote:
> BTW, I have noticed that this version was compiled without -D=PULL93 so
> transition switch list again only has `tls`. Is there any specific
> reason to remove this switch after actual deprecation? It still can be
> very useful for porting D1 to D2 :)

Yeah, I still have DWT Mac OS X left to port.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
November 09, 2013
On Thursday, 7 November 2013 at 16:25:47 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
> On Thursday, 7 November 2013 at 08:58:50 UTC, tester wrote:
>> how do make that comiler work?
>> [Issue 11457] New: Cannot compile 64bit apps with Visual Studio 2013
>>
>> this is a desaster for me. was that release tested? if i amand the pathes and run as admin or not - it will not find the libs (user32)
>>
>> windoes8.1, visual studio2013, 64bit
>
> This never worked automatically before so I don't know how this could suddenly be a disaster. In this release the installer makes an attempt to detect your VC++ and SDK installation and fix up sc.ini to point to them.  It's brand new and only a few people responded to my call for help testing it. Post your sc.ini and the paths to your Windows 8.1 SDK and Visual C++ 2013 installation.

i have tested windows 8.1/vc 2013/sdk 8.1, here are my paths:

mspdb120 path:
---
%VCINSTALLDIR%\..\VC\bin
---
(full:  C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio
12.0\VC\bin)

libs path:
---
%WindowsSdkDir%\Lib\winv6.3\um\x64
---
(full:  C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows
Kits\8.1\Lib\winv6.3\um\x64)

adding this stuff to sc.ini allows to build with dmd 2.064.2 with
-m64
November 11, 2013
On 2013-11-05 23:08, Walter Bright wrote:
> Ok, this is it:
>
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.i386.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_i386.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2.exe
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.zip
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.dmg
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_i386.deb

The version says "DMD64 D Compiler v2.064" instead of "DMD64 D Compiler v2.064.2".

The Mac OS X installer is an old version. It's installs the correct version of the compiler but the text in the installer is outdated.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
November 11, 2013
El 11/11/13 19:00, Jacob Carlborg ha escrit:
> 
> The version says "DMD64 D Compiler v2.064" instead of "DMD64 D Compiler v2.064.2".
> 

Same on Linux.

On v2.064.2:
...
DMD64 D Compiler v2.064
...

On v2.063.2:
...
DMD64 D Compiler v2.063.2
...

-- 
Jordi Sayol
November 11, 2013
On 11 Nov 2013 20:32, "Jordi Sayol" <g.sayol@yahoo.es> wrote:
>
> El 11/11/13 19:00, Jacob Carlborg ha escrit:
> >
> > The version says "DMD64 D Compiler v2.064" instead of "DMD64 D Compiler
v2.064.2".
> >

Walter said the version number was not updated before compile, sounded like he preferred not to have to recompile everything just for the version number.


February 06, 2014
On 05/11/2013 22:08, Walter Bright wrote:
> Ok, this is it:
>
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.i386.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064.2-0_i386.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.i386.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2-0.openSUSE.x86_64.rpm
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064.2.exe
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.zip
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.2.dmg
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_amd64.deb
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/libphobos2-64_2.064.2-0_i386.deb

Regarding the new eponymous template syntax, has this change been updated in the language spec? Seems not.
Does this syntax support template constraints? According to the compiler, seems not, but this should be in the spec.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Next ›   Last »