View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On Monday, December 10, 2012 08:40:25 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> 4. What will happen to Win64, is that ready for release?

It'll probably be left in with the changelog stating that it's at alpha 
quality. That's pretty much what happened with 64-bit support on Linux.

- Jonathan M Davis
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On 2012-12-10 01:33, Walter Bright wrote:
> It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on tidying
> up the regressions.

What about the release and development process we've been talking about 
for, I don't know, the last three releases. What's happening on that front?

> This will be the last official D1 release.

Is it already time? Still no support for dynamic libraries in sight:

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/jc0ic5$18bv$2@digitalmars.com?page=8#post-jc9qus:248o0:242:40digitalmars.com

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On Monday, December 10, 2012 08:50:39 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> > This will be the last official D1 release.
> 
> Is it already time? Still no support for dynamic libraries in sight:
> 
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/jc0ic5$18bv$2@digitalmars.com?page=8#post-jc9q
> us:248o0:242:40digitalmars.com

It was previously stated that official support for D1 was ending at the end of 
this year, so it makes perfect sense that the next release would be the last 
one given that it's likely to be later this month (though could be at the 
beginning of next year if sorting out regressions takes too long). AFAIK, D1 
hasn't gotten any new features in ages, and if it doesn't support dynamic 
libraries yet, I wouldn't expect it to ever support them. But that's up to 
Walter.

- Jonathan M Davis
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
10.12.2012 4:33, Walter Bright пишет:
> It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on tidying
> up the regressions.
>
> This will be the last official D1 release.

Sorry, but I have never understand how can anybody call D stable and why 
are you doing all this "support".


Let me explain:

A long time ago I wrote one (not open source) application in D1+Tango.
I'm still supporting it. The last D1 compiler I can use is 1.066 as then 
a fatal regression was introduced and templates became unusable because 
of ICE. Am I the only one who use templates in D1? If not, what is the 
purpose for all this needless D1 releases as compiler doesn't work for 
almost any project with templates?


And let me beat utterly:

Now imagine: a person updated a compiler and get ICE. On *huge* 
codebase. What will he do? He will use old working one. But I decided to 
go further, found a DustMite and decided to find the source of the 
error. Do you know that current D2 compiler ICE-s with compiling 
DustMite? Imagine, what will feel a person when bug finding tool ICE-s a 
compiler? He will probably consider "D is a peace of unstable shit" and 
go away.

And he will be right as it is unforgivable for us to talk about any 
"stability" of D. "D is for crazy nerd who are ready to find, report and 
workaround infinite compiler bugs on any complicated code with 
templates", that's all we can tell.

But I finally managed to compile DustMite without ICE, found the 
regression and reported. Still unfixed...

-- 
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On 12/9/2012 11:40 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> 4. What will happen to Win64, is that ready for release?


It will be an 'alpha' for Win64.
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On 12/9/2012 11:50 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-12-10 01:33, Walter Bright wrote:
>> It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on tidying
>> up the regressions.
>
> What about the release and development process we've been talking about for, I
> don't know, the last three releases. What's happening on that front?

Andrei is working on that, I think he'll do a proposal for it soon.


>> This will be the last official D1 release.
>
> Is it already time? Still no support for dynamic libraries in sight:

If someone wants to do the work to support them, I'll fold it in.
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On 12/10/2012 12:56 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
> A long time ago I wrote one (not open source) application in D1+Tango.
> I'm still supporting it. The last D1 compiler I can use is 1.066 as then a fatal
> regression was introduced and templates became unusable because of ICE. Am I the
> only one who use templates in D1? If not, what is the purpose for all this
> needless D1 releases as compiler doesn't work for almost any project with
> templates?

What is the bugzilla issue number for that? In bugzilla, you can tag issues as 
being "regressions", and I don't recall seeing one like you describe. Here is 
the current list of regressions:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_severity=regression&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED


> And let me beat utterly:
>
> Now imagine: a person updated a compiler and get ICE. On *huge* codebase. What
> will he do? He will use old working one. But I decided to go further, found a
> DustMite and decided to find the source of the error. Do you know that current
> D2 compiler ICE-s with compiling DustMite? Imagine, what will feel a person when
> bug finding tool ICE-s a compiler? He will probably consider "D is a peace of
> unstable shit" and go away.
>
> And he will be right as it is unforgivable for us to talk about any "stability"
> of D. "D is for crazy nerd who are ready to find, report and workaround infinite
> compiler bugs on any complicated code with templates", that's all we can tell.
>
> But I finally managed to compile DustMite without ICE, found the regression and
> reported. Still unfixed...

What is the bugzilla issue number?
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On 2012-12-10 09:56, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:

> Sorry, but I have never understand how can anybody call D stable and why
> are you doing all this "support".
>
>
> Let me explain:
>
> A long time ago I wrote one (not open source) application in D1+Tango.
> I'm still supporting it. The last D1 compiler I can use is 1.066 as then
> a fatal regression was introduced and templates became unusable because
> of ICE. Am I the only one who use templates in D1? If not, what is the
> purpose for all this needless D1 releases as compiler doesn't work for
> almost any project with templates?

I have still one project left that uses D1 and Tango. It do have some 
templates but not much and not anything advanced.

> And let me beat utterly:
>
> Now imagine: a person updated a compiler and get ICE. On *huge*
> codebase. What will he do? He will use old working one. But I decided to
> go further, found a DustMite and decided to find the source of the
> error. Do you know that current D2 compiler ICE-s with compiling
> DustMite? Imagine, what will feel a person when bug finding tool ICE-s a
> compiler? He will probably consider "D is a peace of unstable shit" and
> go away.
>
> And he will be right as it is unforgivable for us to talk about any
> "stability" of D. "D is for crazy nerd who are ready to find, report and
> workaround infinite compiler bugs on any complicated code with
> templates", that's all we can tell.
>
> But I finally managed to compile DustMite without ICE, found the
> regression and reported. Still unfixed...

I understand your frustration and feel the same.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On 2012-12-10 12:07, Walter Bright wrote:

> If someone wants to do the work to support them, I'll fold it in.

Same old, same old. I guess I have to do it myself if I want something done.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
December 10, 2012
Re: Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)
On 12/10/2012 4:30 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-12-10 12:07, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> If someone wants to do the work to support them, I'll fold it in.
>
> Same old, same old. I guess I have to do it myself if I want something done.


BTW, I've fixed every bug report on the dynamic libraries where anyone 
identified an issue with how dmd generates PIC code for dynamic libraries.
1 2 3 4 5 6
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home