http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/windows-server-2003/

Which means that (strictly speaking), in 3 weeks time, there will be *no* operating system that supports CodeView debugging.

This is an elongated way of asking

"Can I remove -gc yet?"

But as I'm not a Windows user, I'll have to ask how you guys deal with debugging, and if you still rely on CV being emitted from DMD, you must hurry up to implement an alternative!

Iain.

cv2pdb?

On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 16:10:44 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/windows-server-2003/
>
> Which means that (strictly speaking), in 3 weeks time, there will be *no* operating system that supports CodeView debugging.
>
> This is an elongated way of asking
>
> "Can I remove -gc yet?"
>
> But as I'm not a Windows user, I'll have to ask how you guys deal with debugging, and if you still rely on CV being emitted from DMD, you must hurry up to implement an alternative!
>
> Iain.

Can't speak for all Windows users, but I think we mostly let cv2pdb convert CV into something other tools understand.

On 6/24/15 12:10 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/windows-server-2003/
>
> Which means that (strictly speaking), in 3 weeks time, there will be
> *no* operating system that supports CodeView debugging.
>
> This is an elongated way of asking
>
> "Can I remove -gc yet?"
>
> But as I'm not a Windows user, I'll have to ask how you guys deal with
> debugging, and if you still rely on CV being emitted from DMD, you must
> hurry up to implement an alternative!

XP still has more market share right now than Windows 8.1, and that was EOL in April 2014.

I think it's safe to say the fact that the OS goes EOL doesn't mean we should stop supporting it. And server OS migration moves much slower usually.

So I'd say no.

-Steve

On Thursday, 25 June 2015 at 13:53:40 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 6/24/15 12:10 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/windows-server-2003/
>>
>> Which means that (strictly speaking), in 3 weeks time, there will be
>> *no* operating system that supports CodeView debugging.
>>
>> This is an elongated way of asking
>>
>> "Can I remove -gc yet?"
>>
>> But as I'm not a Windows user, I'll have to ask how you guys deal with
>> debugging, and if you still rely on CV being emitted from DMD, you must
>> hurry up to implement an alternative!
>
> XP still has more market share right now than Windows 8.1, and that was EOL in April 2014.
>
> I think it's safe to say the fact that the OS goes EOL doesn't mean we should stop supporting it. And server OS migration moves much slower usually.
>
> So I'd say no.

We already dropped official support for XP some time ago. If someone really wants to use an older platform that isn't even supported by the folks that made it, I'd argue that they should just use an older version of the D compiler from when that OS actually was supported. It's enough of a burden trying to support all of the platforms that we support right now without worrying about platforms which aren't even supported by the folks that made them. And anyone who uses an OS that's not supported is just begging for trouble anyway given how the number of known security holes is just going to increase.  Also, no new software is going to target unsupported platforms anyway, so why support it? The old stuff can continue to work with older compilers that were actually written for that platform, and the new stuff is going to be on current platforms.

Personally, I'm all for dropping official support of a platform when the folks making it drop support for it. It's the simplest that way and helps reduce how much we have to worry about.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Thursday, 25 June 2015 at 13:53:40 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> And server OS migration moves much slower usually.

Is it so? Do you mean windows server OS specifically?

On 6/25/15 11:27 AM, Kagamin wrote:
> On Thursday, 25 June 2015 at 13:53:40 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> And server OS migration moves much slower usually.
>
> Is it so? Do you mean windows server OS specifically?

I mean people who are in charge of maintaining company-wide systems that are expensive to upgrade do not upgrade their equipment or OS as often as those who buy desktops/laptops.

All of our server systems are on Ubuntu LTS, and it's a major event to update the OS. We try to minimize that.

Of course, this is my opinion, based on experience and logic. I haven't measured.

-Steve

http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-windows-server-market-share-by-version
Can't find any info on it.

On Thursday, 25 June 2015 at 16:05:57 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> I mean people who are in charge of maintaining company-wide systems that are expensive to upgrade do not upgrade their equipment or OS as often as those who buy desktops/laptops.

To upgrade from XP you need to upgrade hardware. Upgrading server OS is cheaper than upgrading all workstations in organization.

> All of our server systems are on Ubuntu LTS, and it's a major event to update the OS. We try to minimize that.

Sure upgrades can't be done often, but for XP it's even less often, than for the server, it runs since 2002 :)

On 06/25/2015 09:53 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>
> XP still has more market share right now than Windows 8.1, and that was
> EOL in April 2014.
>

Heh, that's awesome actually :)  Got a source for that?