On 05/23/2013 11:39 PM, Kiith-Sa wrote:
> D:YAML might be of use if needed.
> 
> Also, Derelict3 might be a good idea. Derelict has been actively maintained for pretty much most of D's history.

Nice thoughts. :-)  Thanks for introducing me to YAML -- I may have some use for that at some point ...

On Thursday, 23 May 2013 at 17:22:31 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 5/23/13 10:30 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Having listened to Andrei and Walter's Q&A and read some of the discussion
>> surrounding it, an idea occurred to me.
>>
>> How about leveraging the selection of 3rd-party D code out there to provide a
>> testing framework for D's stability as a language?
>
> I think that's a great idea. What would be a seed of 1-3 projects? I wonder how difficult it would be for Brad to set up some beta testing scripts on the build machines.
>

I'd be happy to propose some code. The downside is that it require more than 2.5Gb of RAM to build, due to dmd leaking and bug in the separate compilation model.

On 2013-05-23 23:26, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:

> I'm not familiar with them and didn't know their maintenance status, otherwise
> I'd have suggested both.  I was also wondering about your dvm and/or orbit ... ?

Tango and DWT is not maintained that much. Basically just to get them compile one the latest versions of DMD. Orbit is not ready yet. DVM is written in D1.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Thursday, 23 May 2013 at 18:45:52 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote:
> I think this ought to be prototyped independent of the current systems.
>  It's got _some_ commonality.  It's also likely to be a lot of work, which I don't have time for.

If you can write a short spec on what do you need to launch this easily, I am happy to volunteer.

On 05/24/2013 09:53 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> Tango and DWT is not maintained that much. Basically just to get them compile one the latest versions of DMD.

That's sufficiently maintained for the purposes outlined here, and feedback from the test framework would be helpful in keeping them up to date in that way.

On 2013-05-24 12:53, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:

> That's sufficiently maintained for the purposes outlined here, and feedback from
> the test framework would be helpful in keeping them up to date in that way.

Absolutely.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 5/24/13 1:02 AM, Dicebot wrote:
> On Thursday, 23 May 2013 at 18:45:52 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote:
>> I think this ought to be prototyped independent of the current systems.
>>  It's got _some_ commonality.  It's also likely to be a lot of work,
>> which I don't have time for.
>
> If you can write a short spec on what do you need to launch this easily,
> I am happy to volunteer.

That's part of the work required.. deciding what to actually do.