June 05, 2012
it's time to make a decision. Original comment: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/212#issuecomment-5827106

So what we will do with Windows 2000? Personally I don't like this pull request (druntime pull 212). It makes not-very-good-looking druntime uglier. I'd like voting about this to be done. Something like:

1. Officially announce that minimum supported Windows version is 5.1 (aka XP) since v2.053
  1. Add link like "Email @denis-sh to get D stuff with partial support for Windows 2000".
  2. Just call all Windows 2000 users dinosaurs.

2. [A bit improve and] Merge this pull and officially announce that Windows 2000 is partially supported.

3. Maniacally add full Windows 2000 support.

4. Leave Issue 6024 opened forever.



And from my next comment https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/212#issuecomment-5827146:
Oh, it's few days more than a year Windows 2000 is silently unsupported!

Links:
* http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6024


-- 
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij
June 05, 2012
Drop support since even Microsoft dropped support. Even if druntime will support Windows 2000, all my the programs I code will at least require Windows XP.
June 05, 2012
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:43 PM, mta`chrono <chrono@mta-international.net>wrote:

> Drop support since even Microsoft dropped support. Even if druntime will support Windows 2000, all my the programs I code will at least require Windows XP.
>

+1

-- 
Bye,
Gor Gyolchanyan.


June 05, 2012
On 05-06-2012 16:52, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:43 PM, mta`chrono <chrono@mta-international.net
> <mailto:chrono@mta-international.net>> wrote:
>
>     Drop support since even Microsoft dropped support. Even if druntime will
>     support Windows 2000, all my the programs I code will at least require
>     Windows XP.
>
>
> +1
>
> --
> Bye,
> Gor Gyolchanyan.

Agreed.

-- 
Alex Rønne Petersen
alex@lycus.org
http://lycus.org
June 05, 2012
On 05.06.2012 18:57, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 05-06-2012 16:52, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:43 PM, mta`chrono <chrono@mta-international.net
>> <mailto:chrono@mta-international.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Drop support since even Microsoft dropped support. Even if druntime will
>> support Windows 2000, all my the programs I code will at least require
>> Windows XP.
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> --
>> Bye,
>> Gor Gyolchanyan.
>
> Agreed.
>

Same here, just make it official and be done with it.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky
June 05, 2012
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 05.06.2012 18:57, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>>
>> On 05-06-2012 16:52, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:43 PM, mta`chrono <chrono@mta-international.net <mailto:chrono@mta-international.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Drop support since even Microsoft dropped support. Even if druntime will support Windows 2000, all my the programs I code will at least require Windows XP.
>>>
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bye,
>>> Gor Gyolchanyan.
>>
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>
> Same here, just make it official and be done with it.
>
> --
> Dmitry Olshansky


So, the set of supported operating systems will be:
1. Windows XP +
2. POSIX

If it was not for the damned Windows, there would be a single universal operating system interface for all operating systems.

--
Bye,
Gor Gyolchanyan.
June 05, 2012
On 05.06.2012 19:31, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Dmitry Olshansky<dmitry.olsh@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>> On 05.06.2012 18:57, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05-06-2012 16:52, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:43 PM, mta`chrono<chrono@mta-international.net
>>>> <mailto:chrono@mta-international.net>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Drop support since even Microsoft dropped support. Even if druntime will
>>>> support Windows 2000, all my the programs I code will at least require
>>>> Windows XP.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bye,
>>>> Gor Gyolchanyan.
>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>
>> Same here, just make it official and be done with it.
>>
>> --
>> Dmitry Olshansky
>
>
> So, the set of supported operating systems will be:
> 1. Windows XP +
> 2. POSIX
>
> If it was not for the damned Windows, there would be a single
> universal operating system interface for all operating systems.
>

If POSIX standardization was ever successful. If all you need is covered by oldish Unix interface, if ... And there is ton of small details that try to stub you in the eye while porting from say Linux to OS X.


-- 
Dmitry Olshansky
June 05, 2012
On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 19:31 +0400, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote: [...]

> If it was not for the damned Windows, there would be a single universal operating system interface for all operating systems.

On the other hand, Windows represents something of the order of 85% of all shipped workstations, and, reputedly, 70% of all developers develop in Windows. So whilst I eshew Windows, I recognize that programming languages and development tools must be well supported on Windows, as well as Mac OS X, Linux, UNIX, etc. to have any possibility of any traction.

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder


June 05, 2012
On Tuesday, June 05, 2012 19:34:38 Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> > If it was not for the damned Windows, there would be a single universal operating system interface for all operating systems.
> 
> If POSIX standardization was ever successful. If all you need is covered by oldish Unix interface, if ... And there is ton of small details that try to stub you in the eye while porting from say Linux to OS X.

When writing std.datetime, I was shocked to find out that Mac OS X doesn't have the librt functions in spite of the fact that they're POSIX. My guess is that they're from some version of POSIX that Mac OS X doesn't support, but regardless, the fact that something is POSIX doesn't seem to actually guarantee much. It puts you in the general ballpark of your stuff working if it's using POSIX stuff, but you have to make it sure (and potentially tweak) everything that you do which relies on POSIX functionality for each OS to make sure that it functions correctly. All you have to do is go through druntime and see all of the differences between each of the POSIX systems to see how much they vary, in spite of the fact that they're all supposedly following the POSIX standard.

- Jonathan M Davis
June 05, 2012
On 05/06/2012 08:43, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
<snip>
> 2. [A bit improve and] Merge this pull and officially announce that Windows 2000 is
> partially supported.
<snip>

Best course of action IMO.  After all, it's only a few blocks of code in two files.  I can't see what the fuss over folding it in is about.

Stewart.
« First   ‹ Prev
1 2 3
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home