View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
February 14, 2009
Just one more thing...
Now includes Mac OSX version!

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.040.zip


http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.025.zip

Expect bugs. Thread local storage isn't working on OSX, neither are 
sockets and memory mapped files (for unknown reasons).

Thanks to Sean Kelly for a lot of help on the runtime library with this.
February 14, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
Walter Bright wrote:

> Now includes Mac OSX version!
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.040.zip
> 
...
> Expect bugs. Thread local storage isn't working on OSX, neither are 
> sockets and memory mapped files (for unknown reasons).
> 
> Thanks to Sean Kelly for a lot of help on the runtime library with this.

I gather this only works with Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" ?

$ dmd/osx/bin/dmd hello.d
Bus error

Could it be rebuilt with the MacOSX10.4u.sdk, perhaps ?

--anders
February 14, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
Walter Bright wrote:
> Now includes Mac OSX version!
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.040.zip
> 
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.025.zip
> 
> Expect bugs. Thread local storage isn't working on OSX, neither are 
> sockets and memory mapped files (for unknown reasons).
> 
> Thanks to Sean Kelly for a lot of help on the runtime library with this.

Very nice, but what happened to version 2.024 ?
February 14, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Walter Bright
<newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> Now includes Mac OSX version!
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.040.zip
>
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.025.zip
>
> Expect bugs. Thread local storage isn't working on OSX, neither are sockets
> and memory mapped files (for unknown reasons).
>
> Thanks to Sean Kelly for a lot of help on the runtime library with this.

Where'd 2.024 go?  <_<
February 14, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
> 
>> Now includes Mac OSX version!
>>
>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.040.zip
>>
> ...
>> Expect bugs. Thread local storage isn't working on OSX, neither are 
>> sockets and memory mapped files (for unknown reasons).
>>
>> Thanks to Sean Kelly for a lot of help on the runtime library with this.
> 
> I gather this only works with Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" ?
> 
> $ dmd/osx/bin/dmd hello.d
> Bus error
> 
> Could it be rebuilt with the MacOSX10.4u.sdk, perhaps ?

It works with whatever came with the Mac mini install disk <g>. I have 
no idea about other setups.
February 14, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
Extrawurst wrote:
> Very nice, but what happened to version 2.024 ?

test version
February 14, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
Anders F Björklund wrote:
> I gather this only works with Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" ?
> 
> $ dmd/osx/bin/dmd hello.d
> Bus error
> 
> Could it be rebuilt with the MacOSX10.4u.sdk, perhaps ?

Is 10.5 really binary incompatible with 10.4 ? And not even a nice 
message when it isn't?
February 14, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
This is what D actually needs: improving the tool-chain, fixing bugs, 
supporting additional architectures...

Sure, the language itself and the standard library still need a lot of work.

But D would already be quite usable, if only the compiler wouldn't choke 
up on circular module dependencies all the time, or if OPTLINK.EXE 
wouldn't keep crashing for no reasons, and all that. I understand that 
fixing bugs isn't all that simple or even gratifying, but having a 
stable and robust tool-chain is the most important things of all.

(Note: this is IMO one of the reasons, why C is still used, even for new 
projects.)

So I'm really happy to see that you take the time to address tool-chain 
issues. Good going!
February 14, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
"Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
news:gn7cvo$tot$3@digitalmars.com...
> Anders F Björklund wrote:
>> I gather this only works with Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" ?
>>
>> $ dmd/osx/bin/dmd hello.d
>> Bus error
>>
>> Could it be rebuilt with the MacOSX10.4u.sdk, perhaps ?
>
> Is 10.5 really binary incompatible with 10.4 ? And not even a nice message 
> when it isn't?

Every time Apple puts out a new OSX version, they pretty much stop caring 
about the previous one (at least when compared to the Win and Lin worlds). 
Unless things have changed far more than I'm aware of since I was using OSX, 
backwords-compatibility problems are just sort of the nature of the Mac 
world.
February 15, 2009
Re: Just one more thing...
On 2009-02-14 16:27:22 -0500, Walter Bright <newshound1@digitalmars.com> said:

> Anders F Björklund wrote:
>> I gather this only works with Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" ?
>> 
>> $ dmd/osx/bin/dmd hello.d
>> Bus error
>> 
>> Could it be rebuilt with the MacOSX10.4u.sdk, perhaps ?
> 
> Is 10.5 really binary incompatible with 10.4 ?

It is compatible, unless you're using a new API or new linker features 
which weren't available in 10.4.

Development on Mac OS X works by choosing a target SDK and a deployment 
target version. Unless you want to use new APIs from 10.5, you should 
use the MacOSX10.4u.sdk SDK. Here's some documentation about how to do 
that:

<http://developer.apple.com/documentation/developertools/conceptual/cross_development/Using/chapter_3_section_2.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20002000-1114311-BABGCAAB>

If 

you use the 10.5 SDK, or no SDK at all, then the new APIs from 10.5 are 
available and if your software links to some of that it won't be 
possible to run it on 10.4. You can set the (minimum) deployment target 
to 10.4 if you want: this will cause functions from 10.5 to be 
weak-linked, and then you can check at runtime if they're available and 
not use them if they're not. But if you don't need anything specific to 
10.5, you should just use the 10.4 SDK and then you'll be pretty sure 
it runs correctly there.


> And not even a nice message when it isn't?

Unfortunately no, not automatically.

-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin@michelf.com
http://michelf.com/
« First   ‹ Prev
1 2 3 4 5
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home