May 30
Hi Marvin,

On 30 May 2017, at 7:36, Marvin Gülker via digitalmars-d-ldc wrote:
> […] as I said earlier I currently don't have enough spare time
> available.

In the time it took you to participate in this thread, you could have probably fixed mingw-w64 support. It really isn't a lot of work. ;)

> Still, thank you all for the pretty informative discussion in
> this thread, I've learned quite a bit about the LDC universe.

You're very welcome! Keep us posted if you have any further questions.

 — David
May 30
On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 09:58:57 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On 29 May 2017, at 19:51, kinke via digitalmars-d-ldc wrote:
>> using GDC when targeting the GNU toolchain on Windows would be a more natural choice IMO.
> Why would you think so? Apart from the first letter in the name, there shouldn't be any reason making LDC a less natural choice for mingw-w64.

Same backend as the MinGW C(++) compiler, so ABI issues etc. should be harder to come by. Although I admittedly gained some more confidence wrt. ABI coverage in the full testsuite. ;)
Next ›   Last »
1 2 3