Is GDC in a usable state?

I am unable to even compile it, either by hand, or by using the portage ebuild that was provided on the Gentoo bugtracker (which does not even notice it failure and proceeds to tell me that I successfully merged gdc, despite the obvious lack of an executable).

imho, the lack of a truly portable and widely available compiler, for which the best (or fastest-to-implement, least-effort-required, although I really do not know about compiler writing) possiblity is probably a gcc frontend, is a serious problem for D being adopted. I, for one, cannot adopt D, as dmd is not portable to my personal system, so I have to play around with it on a dev box via ssh. ;)

- ben

ben@0x539.de schrieb:
> Is GDC in a usable state?

A short while ago, it was. That is, it was said to work mostly very well.

> I am unable to even compile it, either by hand, or by using the portage ebuild
> that was provided on the Gentoo bugtracker (which does not even notice it
> failure and proceeds to tell me that I successfully merged gdc, despite the
> obvious lack of an executable).

Hum. Then someone who uses some Unix and knows GCC should fix it. :)

This is probably due to some GCC changes or perhaps something else is wrong. I would be glad to help, but unfortumately i'm too short of time, and i'd have to do it on cygwin because i can't stand Unices very well.

> imho, the lack of a truly portable and widely available compiler, for which the
> best (or fastest-to-implement, least-effort-required, although I really do not
> know about compiler writing) possiblity is probably a gcc frontend, is a serious
> problem for D being adopted. I, for one, cannot adopt D, as dmd is not portable
> to my personal system, so I have to play around with it on a dev box via ssh. ;)

What have we done to you? You talk as if we should be ashamed of something and alike. We, lazy bastards don't promote our favorite language. We're simply not much better than yourself. What a shame.

-eye

In article <cft2ck$140e$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Ilya Minkov says...
>
>ben@0x539.de schrieb:
>> Is GDC in a usable state?
>
>A short while ago, it was. That is, it was said to work mostly very well.

That's good to hear :)


>> I am unable to even compile it, either by hand, or by using the portage ebuild that was provided on the Gentoo bugtracker (which does not even notice it failure and proceeds to tell me that I successfully merged gdc, despite the obvious lack of an executable).
>
>Hum. Then someone who uses some Unix and knows GCC should fix it. :)
>
>This is probably due to some GCC changes or perhaps something else is wrong. I would be glad to help, but unfortumately i'm too short of time, and i'd have to do it on cygwin because i can't stand Unices very well.

Well, if it is actually compiling, I might be able to hack the gcc source tree enough on my own, or perhaps downgrade a bit.

>> imho, the lack of a truly portable and widely available compiler, for which the best (or fastest-to-implement, least-effort-required, although I really do not know about compiler writing) possiblity is probably a gcc frontend, is a serious problem for D being adopted. I, for one, cannot adopt D, as dmd is not portable to my personal system, so I have to play around with it on a dev box via ssh. ;)
>
>What have we done to you? You talk as if we should be ashamed of something and alike. We, lazy bastards don't promote our favorite language. We're simply not much better than yourself. What a shame.

Oops, sorry. This was not supposed like an attack -- I am aware of and greatly
appreciate the effort everybody is putting into this.
I just wanted to give a kind of status report, and some reasoning as to why you
folks' work rocks so much. I guess I forgot to stress that part.

>-eye

Forgive me :)
- ben

ben@0x539.de wrote:
> Is GDC in a usable state?
> 
> I am unable to even compile it, either by hand, or by using the portage ebuild
> that was provided on the Gentoo bugtracker (which does not even notice it
> failure and proceeds to tell me that I successfully merged gdc, despite the
> obvious lack of an executable).

I don't have much experience with Linux/GNU/GCC/portage things, but have you tried the package at?

http://home.earthlink.net/~dvdfrdmn/d/

I had the impression that it compiled and worked reasonably well back when it was first released.

-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

In article <cfu2ro$1j3p$1@digitaldaemon.com>, J C Calvarese says...
>I don't have much experience with Linux/GNU/GCC/portage things, but have you tried the package at?
>
>http://home.earthlink.net/~dvdfrdmn/d/
>
>I had the impression that it compiled and worked reasonably well back when it was first released.

Mhm, indeed. I now do have a gdc executable, but I failed to build phobos. Thanks :)

-ben

Ben Herr schrieb:
> Oops, sorry. This was not supposed like an attack -- I am aware of and greatly
> appreciate the effort everybody is putting into this.
> I just wanted to give a kind of status report, and some reasoning as to why you
> folks' work rocks so much. I guess I forgot to stress that part.

I'm sorry. I should drop that habit of chasing people into the dead end. :)