On Friday, 4 February 2022 at 14:45:22 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
> Would it hurt if 32-bit was removed from D? Not much, we would manage to call an older compiler. It has to be balanced with the small opportunity loss though.

64-bit compiler can compile 32-bit code.

On Thursday, 3 February 2022 at 01:42:54 UTC, forkit wrote:
> In trying to get my head around the build process on Windows, I find myself asking 'what is the rationale for continuing to maintain 32bit on Windows'.

Everything works out of the box there.

(Probably thanks to the DigitalMars C runtime) apps compiled for 32bit OMF will just launch on another Windows box without having to deal with any runtime stuff (ie no need to install some Visual C++ Redistributable in advance)…

- Elias

On Friday, 25 February 2022 at 14:12:50 UTC, 0xEAB wrote:
> On Thursday, 3 February 2022 at 01:42:54 UTC, forkit wrote:
>> In trying to get my head around the build process on Windows, I find myself asking 'what is the rationale for continuing to maintain 32bit on Windows'.
>
> Everything works out of the box there.
>
> (Probably thanks to the DigitalMars C runtime) apps compiled for 32bit OMF will just launch on another Windows box without having to deal with any runtime stuff (ie no need to install some Visual C++ Redistributable in advance)…
>
> - Elias

C'mon. How many developers using D, are compiling 32bit OMF apps?

Additionaly, how many 'newcomers' are going to want to start there development journey, with 32bit apps, let alone 32bit OMF.

32bit IMO just creates unnecessary complexity to the source managment, the build/test processes, and the developement environment(s).

On Thursday, 3 February 2022 at 01:42:54 UTC, forkit wrote:
> In trying to get my head around the build process on Windows, I find myself asking 'what is the rationale for continuing to maintain 32bit on Windows'.

What Max Samukha said, support for purely 32-bit Windows is ending but the 64-bit Windows will continue to run 32-bit applications.

D is a systems programming language, that wants to place high emphasis on portability. It's not enough to just compile to the most common binary formats.

On Friday, 25 February 2022 at 21:14:16 UTC, forkit wrote:
> C'mon. How many developers using D, are compiling 32bit OMF apps?

C'mon. How many developers using D, are using Windows (where OMF is a thing) in the first place. What a poor metric.

> Additionaly, how many 'newcomers' are going to want to start there development journey, with 32bit apps, let alone 32bit OMF.

Additionaly, how many 'novices' are going to start installing Visual C++ Redistributable, after seeing the error message, let alone understanding what MSVCxy.DLL is.

> 32bit IMO just creates unnecessary complexity to the source managment, the build/test processes, and the developement
> environment(s).

I don't see how something you don't use, would create complexity for you.

On the other hand, I've not been given an appropriate solution on how to build portable D apps on Windows yet.

- Elias

On Saturday, 26 February 2022 at 14:45:08 UTC, 0xEAB wrote:
>
> C'mon. How many developers using D, are using Windows (where OMF is a thing) in the first place. What a poor metric.

Umm.. in the 'real' world, I expect there are more developers using Windows, than either linux or macOS, and likely to be even more true for newbies.


>
> Additionaly, how many 'novices' are going to start installing Visual C++ Redistributable, after seeing the error message, let alone understanding what MSVCxy.DLL is.
>

Wow. It's easier to install buildtools (or VS) than D actually.


>
> I don't see how something you don't use, would create complexity for you.

Well, the first thing I had to work out, was why D was creating 32bit omf exe's!! Why does it even have a 64bit dmd.exe when that exe is not even in the path. Why is rdmd only in the 32bit folder...why..why.. why... that's what you'll be asking once you delve into things beyond hello world. I won't even mention trying to get your head around the build process (as I install/build from source these days).

In the end, if you want to 'get involved' in D, you need to accept all the outdated bagage that comes with it.

>
> On the other hand, I've not been given an appropriate solution on how to build portable D apps on Windows yet.
>

Good luck with that.

On Friday, 25 February 2022 at 21:14:16 UTC, forkit wrote:
> C'mon. How many developers using D, are compiling 32bit OMF apps?

Less than ever before! -m32 now builds for COFF in master. give that a few releases and we should be in a position to start deprecating OMF.

> Additionaly, how many 'newcomers' are going to want to start there development journey, with 32bit apps,

Very few.

>let alone 32bit OMF.

None.