On 6/22/2012 7:51 AM, Mehrdad wrote:
> But lots of other parts about D (TLS, GC, etc.) still have that problem though.
> I was never able to get the __xi_a, __xi_z, etc. stuff correct, and I've spent a
> heck of a lot of time on it.

Those are defined by Microsoft, and hold pointers to static constructors from Microsoft C generated code. It's unused by DMC, except to not muck them up in case someone links in MSC generated code.

On Friday, 22 June 2012 at 17:33:17 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
> I have no reason not to. :)
> But I also have a hard time integrating that fact into the rest of the discussion, since I obviously don't know Russian.
In general, it is easy to write two very different statements in Russian which may be considered to have similar or equivalent meanings. In many cases it is OK to say something figuratively, and people will very likely perceive the meaning correctly. That may easily become a habit. This often causes me to say vague statements in English.

On Friday, 22 June 2012 at 17:41:06 UTC, Roman D. Boiko wrote:
> On Friday, 22 June 2012 at 17:33:17 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
>> I have no reason not to. :)
>> But I also have a hard time integrating that fact into the rest of the discussion, since I obviously don't know Russian.
> In general, it is easy to write two very different statements in Russian which may be considered to have similar or equivalent meanings. In many cases it is OK to say something figuratively, and people will very likely perceive the meaning correctly. That may easily become a habit. This often causes me to say vague statements in English.

No I mean, I understand what you're saying. It's just that, well, the writer's nationality is sorta beyond my scope as a reader. :-)

Am 22.06.2012 19:23, schrieb Walter Bright:
> On 6/22/2012 7:11 AM, Mehrdad wrote:
>>> One way is to get the library source code for the C compiler and study it.
>> By "get" you mean "buy", right?
> 
> For Digital Mars C, yes you can buy it. For gcc, you can look at the C library source code for free. I'm sure the latter does the same things.
> 
>> I find that to be against D's (supposedly) open-source nature...
> 
> D is open source, however, that isn't necessarily true of C. For example, the Win64 version of dmd will be designed to work with Microsoft VS, which will cost $500.
> 
> 

I'm afright. Please explain what is meant by this, Walter.

On Friday, 22 June 2012 at 18:26:22 UTC, mta`chrono wrote:
> Am 22.06.2012 19:23, schrieb Walter Bright:
>> D is open source, however, that isn't necessarily true of C. For example, the Win64 version of dmd will be designed to work with
>> Microsoft VS, which will cost $500.
>
> I'm afright. Please explain what is meant by this, Walter.

I also asked for clarification a few posts before. Most likely Walter meant that DMC (not DMD) for Win64 will work with Visual Studio, which is not free. Also DMC is not free, but it costs way below $500.

On 6/22/2012 10:28 AM, Roman D. Boiko wrote:
> Did you mean VS will cost $500?

Yes (or whatever price MS sets it at).

> Did you mean Win64 version of dmc (not dmd)?

No. I meant dmd for Win64.

> If no, than how will dmd be designed to work with VS?

By emitting code that will link with VS code & libraries.

On 22-Jun-12 20:08, Mehrdad wrote:
> On Friday, 22 June 2012 at 15:45:30 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>> I actually meant my previous post to be the last in this thread.
>> But here it goes:
>
> Sorry :\
>
>> 1. I classify the above as speculation on my part, namely to put it in
>> other words (not featuring any individual):
>> "this work take a lot of low-level hacking meaning that investigating
>> symbols output by compiler and their meaning is least of problem there
>> usually"
>> That's ALL I meant to say here. You can frame it like advice, insult,
>> promotion or whatever you fell like (it's not like I or someone else
>> can stop you).
>
> The trouble is I only see what you write, not what you think.
>
> What you're writing here is very clearly different in tone from what you
> said before, even if it wasn't intentional.
> (Usually the onus is more on the speaker to get his words across, not on
> the reader to try and decipher them.)

Sorry, like Roman said I'm not native speaker. And I'm not sure of the emotional component of things I type. To be honest no matter what form I use I tend to be neutral in general (or so I thought).

(Except some very rare cases. I recall that I told something harsh in response to the "brilliant idea" of turning enforce into assert with some version statement)

>
>
>> 2. The sarcasm is not lost on me, but for some reason I _think_ you
>> are/were outraged way before my post.
>
> "Outraged"? Not sure at what you're referring specifically...
>

I meant something like this:

> Good luck getting the C-runtime part of the "D runtime" right..
...

> If you have any idea how to implement things like TLS, SEH, and the like, then PLEASE, share them!

You were almost shouting or demanding (or so it seemed to me). I think this was the first time I insulted somebody uninterruptedly and that went totally unexpected for me.

>
>> Being outraged doesn't help sort out things 99% of time (this is my
>> assertion you may disagree).
>
> Totally agree... though (until now) I didn't see any attempt at "sorting
> out" anything. (The second comment only made things worse.)

Good.
And bad, as it seems I need to refresh my word/phrase selection :)

>
>> 3. If anything the mailing list/NG is not technical support
>> (especially "general discussion ones") I'm not obliged to offer you
>> any help. It's all about sharing opinions.
>
> Yes, and I wasn't asking for you to offer me help either.
> But insulting people -- yeah, It's against my expectations to go on an
> NG and be told I'm too stupid to do something. Even if it's your opinion.
>

If anything I'm not about to make any statements aimed at a particular person. If there was insult, I'm sorry as I failed to spot emotional context of things I posted.

>
>> So take it or ignore it and let's move on.
>
> Sure, if you'd like to. (I didn't get that message from you until now.)
>

OK, glad we are (sort of) having some agreement.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky

On 22-Jun-12 22:47, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 6/22/2012 10:28 AM, Roman D. Boiko wrote:
>> Did you mean VS will cost $500?
>
> Yes (or whatever price MS sets it at).
>

I believe SDK with compiler is a free download though I might be off on this.

>> Did you mean Win64 version of dmc (not dmd)?
>
> No. I meant dmd for Win64.
>
>> If no, than how will dmd be designed to work with VS?
>
> By emitting code that will link with VS code & libraries.
>

Great.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky

On Friday, 22 June 2012 at 18:52:41 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> Sorry, like Roman said I'm not native speaker. And I'm not sure of the emotional component of things I type. To be honest no matter what form I use I tend to be neutral in general (or so I thought).

Yeah I'm not a native either, so that doesn't help me so much either... :\
(Though I guess, from another perspective, learning English has also helped me a lot. :P my point's there though.)

> I meant something like this:
>
> > Good luck getting the C-runtime part of the "D runtime"
> right..
> ...
>
> > If you have any idea how to implement things like TLS, SEH,
> and the like, then PLEASE, share them!
>
> You were almost shouting or demanding (or so it seemed to me). I think this was the first time I insulted somebody uninterruptedly and that went totally unexpected for me.

Ah.
I wasn't demanding :-) "shouting" is closer but I wasn't trying to be yelling at anyone :P it just shows I didn't communicate well either. :)


> If anything I'm not about to make any statements aimed at a particular person. If there was insult, I'm sorry as I failed to spot emotional context of things I posted.

Sorry about my misunderstanding as well -- my inference engine kinda failed at inferring what you meant. :P

> OK, glad we are having some agreement.

Yup :)

On Jun 22, 2012, at 11:47 AM, Walter Bright wrote:

> On 6/22/2012 10:28 AM, Roman D. Boiko wrote:
>> Did you mean VS will cost $500?
> 
> Yes (or whatever price MS sets it at).

I think there's a free version of VS.