I would like

- template
- multithreading


On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Walter wrote:

> I'm looking at setting priorities for finishing up a beta compiler.
>
> What features do people need the most to be implemented for a credible beta?
>
> -Walter

"Barry Pederson" <barryp@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3C950345.8060306@yahoo.com...

> OK, that's good to know, but my point was that the docs are lacking even
that
> little bit of info or simple example declaration.  If somebody's
evaluating
> this language, they're gonna want to see that documented a bit, rather
than
> just guessing how it should work, or searching through newsgroup lore.
>
> Also, the page on syntax grammar doesn't contain any definition for
interface
> declarations (although the lexical grammar page does mention "interface"
as a
> keyword).

Yes, right. For now, far the best docs are sources of Phobos - only there you can feel the "taste" of D. That's where I've got most the details from.

"yqz" <"x@y.z"@olo.home> wrote in message news:Pine.WNT.4.44.0203171336540.1328-100000@olo...
>
> I would like
>
> - template
> - multithreading

Multithreading should already be there.
Templates - I thought they aren't planned for the first version.

Thanks for the great report. I'll get to work on it!

"Barry Pederson" <barryp@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3C94E64F.3090702@yahoo.com...
> I know this is something that nobody likes to do, but the documentation
could
> probably use a going-over. [...]

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone@omen.ru> wrote in message news:a732i7$guv$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "yqz" <"x@y.z"@olo.home> wrote in message news:Pine.WNT.4.44.0203171336540.1328-100000@olo...
> > I would like
> > - template
> > - multithreading
> Multithreading should already be there.
> Templates - I thought they aren't planned for the first version.

Multithreading is there in the compiler, but not in Phobos yet.

"Barry Pederson" <barryp@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3C94E64F.3090702@yahoo.com...
> The page on the DMD alpha says " Run: \dmd\bin\shell all.sh in the \dmd\samples\d directory for several small examples.", but that doesn't actually work out-of-the-can - which is a bit vexing to somebody first
taking
> a look at this software.
>
> 1) The comment in "all.sh" about the path to shell.exe needs one more
"..".
> The declaration of "MARS" probably should have "-I\dmd\src\phobos" added,
and
> some mention should be made of also needing to set LIB to \dmd\lib so "sc"
can
> find "phobos.lib", and adding "\dm\bin" to the path so the script can find "sc" (or fixed with declarations in the script).
>
> 2) And if you do make those fixes, the script still bails out trying to
> compile hello2.html with the error "\dmd\src\phobos\object.d(2): symbol
printf
> symbol object.printf conflicts with Object.printf at
\dmd\src\phobos\Object.d(2)"
>
> 3) The chello.d sample fails since there's no "dserver.def" file

Ok, I fired the QA department <g> and fixed the samples directory and it's on the web site now!

I'm all for UNIX support as well.  (Linux, *BSD, MacOS X)

Honestly, I don't use Windows except in VMware when required by my clients.

Actually, I don't quite understand why a compiler would be created
nowadays that doesn't support Windows and at least Intel Linux.  Really,
the differences are minimal.  In fact I often compile objects with
Microsoft VC++ and then link them into my Linux programs (after
converting the object to ELF format).  Assuming the D compiler itself is
fairly portable (either compilable with itself or GCC) I don't see the
problem with supporting UNIX-like systems.  Of course, if the D compiler was open-source then we would probably already have it... hehe ;)

D seems really cool by the way.  I've been looking for something like
this for a long time.  As long as it produces code that runs as fast as
C/C++ and supports UNIX-like systems, then I think D will have a long
future.

Does D do type inferencing?  That is one feature of (good) modern
languages that is really nice.  Combined with a strongly typed language
and it is REALLY nice (see O'Caml).

--
// Chris



andy wrote:

> source code and linux support. :-)

Chris wrote:
> Actually, I don't quite understand why a compiler would be created
> nowadays that doesn't support Windows and at least Intel Linux.  Really,
> the differences are minimal. 

It's a one-man effort at this time, and Walter is running
himself ragged designing the language, implementing it,
fixing the bugs, keeping the docs up to date, and answering
our questions. I assume Walter is capable of doing a Linux
port, but just wants to keep his focus on Win32 at the
moment.

Opening the D compiler sources to lots of other developers
at this stage, is, I think, a bad idea. The language hasn't
gotten locked tightly down enough to hold its ground against
some of the ... questionable ... suggestions I've seen in
the newsgroup.

DFront will allow supporting not just gcc users, but people
who actively dislike gcc.

-Russell B

"Russell Borogove" <kaleja@estarcion.com> wrote in message news:3C96C6C5.1080309@estarcion.com...
> It's a one-man effort at this time, and Walter is running himself ragged designing the language, implementing it, fixing the bugs, keeping the docs up to date, and answering our questions. I assume Walter is capable of doing a Linux port, but just wants to keep his focus on Win32 at the moment.

I'm working on 4 different compilers at the moment, and still people email me wanting me to revive Empire <g>.

Walter wrote:
> "Russell Borogove" <kaleja@estarcion.com> wrote in message
> news:3C96C6C5.1080309@estarcion.com...
> 
>>It's a one-man effort at this time, and Walter is running
>>himself ragged designing the language, implementing it,
>>fixing the bugs, keeping the docs up to date, and answering
>>our questions. I assume Walter is capable of doing a Linux
>>port, but just wants to keep his focus on Win32 at the
>>moment.
>>
> 
> I'm working on 4 different compilers at the moment, and still people email
> me wanting me to revive Empire <g>.

Ooh! Oooh! Empire!

-R