View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
January 05, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
Daniel de Kok Wrote:

> On 2008-12-25 21:30:52 +0100, Walter Bright <newshound1@digitalmars.com> said:
> 
> > What platforms for dmd would you be most interested in using?
> 
> In order of decreasing precedence:
> 
> Mac OS X 64-bit Intel
> Linux x86_64
> Mac OS X 32-bit Intel
> 
> I wouldn't use the other platforms much (if at all).
> 
> Take care,
> Daniel
> 

Just my two bits here.  I would like to see Linux x86_64 support, above all else. I am the guy that added x64 support to ldc, solely because I have nothing but 64bit machines here ;)

This doesn't mean that I use the 64 bit address space and all those registers, and that I max out the system every day (as another part of this thread seems to indicate is a requirement????)...it just means that dmd wouldn't work on my machines and gdc didn't support/compile some code I was using. I needed a working compiler on x64 Linux and poking inside gdc is not my favorite activity, so I updated ldc.

Thanks,
K.Wilson

P.S. I also have access to a PPC Mac, so I guess that would be second on my list...I think Mac support in general would be nice.
January 05, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
"K.Wilson" <k.wilson@nospam.nowhere.com> wrote in message 
news:gjrprj$la5$1@digitalmars.com...
> Daniel de Kok Wrote:
>
>> On 2008-12-25 21:30:52 +0100, Walter Bright <newshound1@digitalmars.com> 
>> said:
>>
>> > What platforms for dmd would you be most interested in using?
>>
>> In order of decreasing precedence:
>>
>> Mac OS X 64-bit Intel
>> Linux x86_64
>> Mac OS X 32-bit Intel
>>
>> I wouldn't use the other platforms much (if at all).
>>
>> Take care,
>> Daniel
>>
>
> Just my two bits here.  I would like to see Linux x86_64 support, above 
> all else. I am the guy that added x64 support to ldc, solely because I 
> have nothing but 64bit machines here ;)
>
> This doesn't mean that I use the 64 bit address space and all those 
> registers, and that I max out the system every day (as another part of 
> this thread seems to indicate is a requirement????)...it just means that 
> dmd wouldn't work on my machines and gdc didn't support/compile some code 
> I was using. I needed a working compiler on x64 Linux and poking inside 
> gdc is not my favorite activity, so I updated ldc.
>

I guess there was confusion about DMD support for a particular host platform 
vs a particular target platform. If DMD does't even run or work correctly on 
64-bit machines, even in 32-bit mode, (I don't know, as I don't use them) 
then yes, that indeed is a very major problem.

> Thanks,
> K.Wilson
>
> P.S. I also have access to a PPC Mac, so I guess that would be second on 
> my list...I think Mac support in general would be nice.
January 07, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I guess there was confusion about DMD support for a particular host platform 
> vs a particular target platform. If DMD does't even run or work correctly on 
> 64-bit machines, even in 32-bit mode, (I don't know, as I don't use them) 
> then yes, that indeed is a very major problem.

I use 32 bit DMD on my Ubuntu 64 box, and it works fine.
January 08, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
Walter Bright Wrote:

> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > I guess there was confusion about DMD support for a particular host platform 
> > vs a particular target platform. If DMD does't even run or work correctly on 
> > 64-bit machines, even in 32-bit mode, (I don't know, as I don't use them) 
> > then yes, that indeed is a very major problem.
> 
> I use 32 bit DMD on my Ubuntu 64 box, and it works fine.

Strange, I have tried dmd on my Ubuntu 64 box and it doesn't work because of 64bit lib incompatibilities...I guess I have something messed up on that machine for 32bit libs?!?

I have since tried dmd on a Ubuntu 64 virtual machine and it does work, so my bad on that count.

Thanks,
K.Wilson
January 08, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
Walter Bright Wrote:

> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > I guess there was confusion about DMD support for a particular host platform 
> > vs a particular target platform. If DMD does't even run or work correctly on 
> > 64-bit machines, even in 32-bit mode, (I don't know, as I don't use them) 
> > then yes, that indeed is a very major problem.
> 
> I use 32 bit DMD on my Ubuntu 64 box, and it works fine.

Strange, I have tried dmd on my Ubuntu 64 box and it doesn't work because of 64bit lib incompatibilities...I guess I have something messed up on that machine for 32bit libs?!?

I have since tried dmd on a Ubuntu 64 virtual machine and it does work, so my bad on that count.

Thanks,
K.Wilson
January 11, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
Syllable - would be nice to see native port of DMD
February 27, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
Hi Walter,

I am embedded systems programmer. I crave to use D when I have to use C/C++.

I would like to see dmd support cross-compilation for ARM(9) family.

In my ideal world (dream :) ) 'gdc' would have been the main line for development
and getting it to run on all the above mentioned platforms would be easy.
AFAIK back-end support for gcc already supports - native x86 32 bit , .Net IL,
bytecode etc.

What I remember from computer language benchmarks performance of gdc was very
close to dmd.
[http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all]

This is one very critical move which can make D mainstream language very soon.

Anyway, you understand these details much better than me.
February 27, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
suresh:
> In my ideal world (dream :) ) 'gdc' would have been the main line for development
> and getting it to run on all the above mentioned platforms would be easy.

Also take a look at LDC:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc
The backend doesn't support exceptions on Windows (the Linux64 and D2 versions, and the lack of support of Phobos will eventually be fixed by LDC developers, I presume).

Bye,
bearophile
February 27, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:01 AM, suresh <sureshkrshukla@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Walter,
>
> I am embedded systems programmer. I crave to use D when I have to use C/C++.
>
> I would like to see dmd support cross-compilation for ARM(9) family.

Downs has gotten GDC to work on ARM at least to an extent.  He was
using it to make some stuff for the Nintendo DS.  I wonder how
stable/complete it is.
February 27, 2009
Re: dmd platform support - poll
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:19 AM, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote:
> suresh:
>> In my ideal world (dream :) ) 'gdc' would have been the main line for development
>> and getting it to run on all the above mentioned platforms would be easy.
>
> Also take a look at LDC:
> http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc
> The backend doesn't support exceptions on Windows (the Linux64 and D2 versions, and the lack of support of Phobos will eventually be fixed by LDC developers, I presume).

I thought I heard that LDC works on 64-bit Linux.  And geez, give them
a break about D2 - it's still in alpha :P
11 12 13 14 15 16
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home