D 2.062 beta (page 2)

Al 08/02/13 19:00, En/na Walter Bright ha escrit: > > On 2/8/2013 3:17 AM, Jordi Sayol wrote: >> Al 08/02/13 11:58, En/na Walter Bright ha escrit: >>> On 2/8/2013 1:08 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >>>> Also: It's a 30MB download, *174MB extracted*, and the vast majority of that is platform-specific binaries. On Windows, stripping the non-Windows binaries eliminates *over 100MB*. >>>> >>>> Isn't it about time we start splitting this giant into per-platform downloads? Finally? >>>> >>> >>> The platform specific ones are done on the release. >> is this true even for windows? > > Yes, there is a Windows-specific install. > Yes, this is correct. I mean that windows installer download the zip file with everything in it. -- Jordi Sayol _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

Al 08/02/13 19:39, En/na Jordi Sayol ha escrit: > Al 08/02/13 19:00, En/na Walter Bright ha escrit: >> >> On 2/8/2013 3:17 AM, Jordi Sayol wrote: >>> Al 08/02/13 11:58, En/na Walter Bright ha escrit: >>>> On 2/8/2013 1:08 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >>>>> Also: It's a 30MB download, *174MB extracted*, and the vast majority of that is platform-specific binaries. On Windows, stripping the non-Windows binaries eliminates *over 100MB*. >>>>> >>>>> Isn't it about time we start splitting this giant into per-platform downloads? Finally? >>>>> >>>> >>>> The platform specific ones are done on the release. >>> is this true even for windows? >> >> Yes, there is a Windows-specific install. >> > > Yes, this is correct. I mean that windows installer download the zip file with everything in it. If split in per-platform zip files is not an option, can the current windows installer handle 7z files? i.e. last beta: dmd.2.062.zip (30.16 MB), dmd.2.062.7z (15.76 MB). -- Jordi Sayol _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:00:46 -0800 Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote: > > On 2/8/2013 3:17 AM, Jordi Sayol wrote: > > Al 08/02/13 11:58, En/na Walter Bright ha escrit: > >> > >> The platform specific ones are done on the release. > > is this true even for windows? > > Yes, there is a Windows-specific install. > I'm not talking about the installers, I'm talking about the zips. _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 2/8/2013 11:10 AM, Jordi Sayol wrote: > > If split in per-platform zip files is not an option, can the current windows installer handle 7z files? No. (The installer is on github in the installer project.) _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

Does this version include the feature that was discussed to make the "literals aren't lvalues" change from 2.061 less of a pain in the ass, especially WRT opCmp? (I forget exactly what the intended feature was). If so, what is it, and how do I use it? (My code's hitting against that problem hard.) If not, then I'd say it's extremely important to get that into this release. I've been avoiding 2.061 just because of that problem. Heck, the "literals aren't lvalues" pain was in the 2.059 beta but REMOVED for 2.059 final SPECIFICALLY because we didn't have a feature in place to make it less of a PITA. _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 2/8/2013 1:17 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > Does this version include the feature that was discussed to make the > "literals aren't lvalues" change from 2.061 less of a pain in the ass, > especially WRT opCmp? (I forget exactly what the intended feature was). > > If so, what is it, and how do I use it? (My code's hitting against that > problem hard.) > > If not, then I'd say it's extremely important to get that into this > release. I've been avoiding 2.061 just because of that problem. Heck, > the "literals aren't lvalues" pain was in the 2.059 beta but REMOVED > for 2.059 final SPECIFICALLY because we didn't have a feature in place > to make it less of a PITA. > _______________________________________________ > The rvalue reference issue is not resolved here. I don't know if anything happened with the particular issue you have, but all the changes are in the changelog, or you can download it and try it. _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On Friday, February 08, 2013 14:44:11 Walter Bright wrote: > The rvalue reference issue is not resolved here. I don't know if anything happened with the particular issue you have, but all the changes are in the changelog, or you can download it and try it. What happens with DIP 25 will have a definite impact on what we eventually end up doing to solve the const& problem in D, since all of that ref stuff is strongly related, and we need the @safety issues with ref sorted out before we decide on something with the const& issue which ends up blowing up in our faces due to @safety issues. - Jonathan M Davis _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

February 08, 2013

Re: [dmd-beta] D 2.062 beta

Posted by Nick Sabalausky
in reply to Walter Bright

Permalink

Nick Sabalausky

Posted in reply to Walter Bright

Permalink

On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 14:44:11 -0800
Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> 
> On 2/8/2013 1:17 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > Does this version include the feature that was discussed to make the "literals aren't lvalues" change from 2.061 less of a pain in the ass, especially WRT opCmp? (I forget exactly what the intended feature was).
> >
> > If so, what is it, and how do I use it? (My code's hitting against
> > that problem hard.)
> >
> > If not, then I'd say it's extremely important to get that into this release. I've been avoiding 2.061 just because of that problem. Heck, the "literals aren't lvalues" pain was in the 2.059 beta but REMOVED for 2.059 final SPECIFICALLY because we didn't have a feature in place to make it less of a PITA. _______________________________________________
> >
> 
> The rvalue reference issue is not resolved here. I don't know if anything happened with the particular issue you have, but all the changes are in the changelog, or you can download it and try it.

Yea, I was already trying it. Fortunately, it appears that *this* time around just simply removing "ref" seems to work...so far anyway. That wasn't the case last time which is what made it so nasty it was removed at the last minute.

I am tracking down one or two other problems now though, looks like at
least one of them has to do with toString on a struct...
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

7z can be used in the same way we use zip in the Windows installer. http://nsis.sourceforge.net/Nsis7z_plug-in NSIS also supports LZMA (7z) packing of included files natively if we ever wanted to switch away from the net installer and have the files be included in the installer itself. BA On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com>wrote: > > On 2/8/2013 11:10 AM, Jordi Sayol wrote: > >> >> If split in per-platform zip files is not an option, can the current windows installer handle 7z files? >> > > No. (The installer is on github in the installer project.) > > ______________________________**_________________ > dmd-beta mailing list > dmd-beta@puremagic.com > http://lists.puremagic.com/**mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta<http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta> >

On Friday, February 08, 2013 18:00:11 Nick Sabalausky wrote: > I am tracking down one or two other problems now though, looks like at least one of them has to do with toString on a struct... IIRC, it was supposed to have been fixed semi-recently so that toString on structs weren't so restrictive about their attributes (e.g. making it const should now work), so that may be related (though that might have been in 2.061; I don't remember). - Jonathan M Davis _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list dmd-beta@puremagic.com http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

Forums