Any progress?

Am 27.10.2013 09:08, schrieb Steve Teale:
> Any progress?

Yes. The implementation of the linux part seems to be done and will be included in 2.064. On windows it will take some time because "export" has to be fixed first.

Kind Regards
Benjamin Thaut

On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 08:23:26 UTC, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
> Am 27.10.2013 09:08, schrieb Steve Teale:
>> Any progress?
>
> Yes. The implementation of the linux part seems to be done and will be included in 2.064. On windows it will take some time because "export" has to be fixed first.
>
> Kind Regards
> Benjamin Thaut

<sarcasm>
wow. cool. most people developing(using) linux version. so what do we have:
we(me?) have COM problems(can't figure what causes them).  we have OS X development which is still real hardcore. but wait, we have more and more working linux version, who need other OS if we had linux \0/
</sarcasm>

On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 08:52:02 UTC, evilrat wrote:
> <sarcasm>
> wow. cool. most people developing(using) linux version. so what do we have:
> we(me?) have COM problems(can't figure what causes them).  we have OS X development which is still real hardcore. but wait, we have more and more working linux version, who need other OS if we had linux \0/
> </sarcasm>

It's time to learn that life is cruel and unjust and people don't do whatever they're ask to do :P.

Am 27.10.2013 09:52, schrieb evilrat:
> On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 08:23:26 UTC, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
>> Am 27.10.2013 09:08, schrieb Steve Teale:
>>> Any progress?
>>
>> Yes. The implementation of the linux part seems to be done and will be
>> included in 2.064. On windows it will take some time because "export"
>> has to be fixed first.
>>
>> Kind Regards
>> Benjamin Thaut
>
> <sarcasm>
> wow. cool. most people developing(using) linux version. so what do we have:
> we(me?) have COM problems(can't figure what causes them).  we have OS X
> development which is still real hardcore. but wait, we have more and
> more working linux version, who need other OS if we had linux \0/
> </sarcasm>

You are welcome to discuss DIP 45 which aims to fix "export" so that shared library support can be added to windows plattforms. You are also welcome to point out wherever you can that you are interrested in shared library support for windows.

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/kvhu2c$2ikq$1@digitalmars.com#post-kvhu2c:242ikq:241:40digitalmars.com

Kind Regards
Benjamin Thaut

On 2013-10-27 09:52, evilrat wrote:

> <sarcasm>
> wow. cool. most people developing(using) linux version. so what do we have:
> we(me?) have COM problems(can't figure what causes them).  we have OS X
> development which is still real hardcore. but wait, we have more and
> more working linux version, who need other OS if we had linux \0/
> </sarcasm>

We most likely need native TLS for Mac OS X before supporting dynamic libraries.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 08:52:02 UTC, evilrat wrote:
> who need other OS if we had linux \0/

So glad to see this becoming a common wisdom :P

On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 08:23:26 UTC, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
> Am 27.10.2013 09:08, schrieb Steve Teale:
>> Any progress?
>
> Yes. The implementation of the linux part seems to be done and will be included in 2.064. On windows it will take some time because "export" has to be fixed first.
>
> Kind Regards
> Benjamin Thaut

Thanks Benjamin - Linux will suit me ;=)

On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 08:23:26 UTC, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
> Am 27.10.2013 09:08, schrieb Steve Teale:
>> Any progress?
>
> Yes. The implementation of the linux part seems to be done and will be included in 2.064. On windows it will take some time because "export" has to be fixed first.
>
> Kind Regards
> Benjamin Thaut

Is there a description somewhere of how this will work? Is it language, Phobos, linker, or what.

On 2013-10-28 18:45, Steve Teale wrote:

> Is there a description somewhere of how this will work? Is it language,
> Phobos, linker, or what.

I guess it's compiler and runtime.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg