On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:51:35 -0700
Walter Bright <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> If you can isolate any of these
> down to dmd/phobos and post them to bugzilla, I would appreciate it
> as it will not only improve the FreeBSD port but will improve the
> test suite to aid in the rest of dmd development.

Sorry didn't say I'd found any but will keep a look out for them.

Walter Bright 写道:
> Now works for FreeBSD 7.1!
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.043.zip
> 
> The D2 version for FreeBSD isn't ready yet. Lots of library work to be done.

That's great! Thanks, Sir!

Maybe it's because of the DMD is packed with zip. After unzipped, it must run

chmod +x dmd/freebsd/bin/dmd

to make dmd working.

Walter Bright wrote:

> Now works for FreeBSD 7.1!

Nice!

But is there a particularly good reason for disregarding version identifiers already established by gdc and ldc?

freebsd vs FreeBSD, darwin vs OSX

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar@igesund.net> wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> Now works for FreeBSD 7.1!
>
> Nice!
>
> But is there a particularly good reason for disregarding version identifiers already established by gdc and ldc?
>
> freebsd vs FreeBSD, darwin vs OSX
>

And if not, why is there no Linux ? This is the obvious reason for GDC/LDC pick the lowercase identifiers in the first place ...

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
> 
>> Now works for FreeBSD 7.1!
> 
> Nice!
> 
> But is there a particularly good reason for disregarding version identifiers already established by gdc and ldc?
> 
> freebsd vs FreeBSD, darwin vs OSX

FreeBSD is how it is normally written in the official FreeBSD literature, such as : http://www.freebsd.org/

Also, gcc on FreeBSD predefines __FreeBSD__

Clearly, FreeBSD is the term preferred by the FreeBSD community.

The Mac OSX documentation does not refer to it as darwin, it normally refers to it as OSX. You have to work hard to find any references to darwin on the Apple web site. Nevertheless, "darwin" is predefined for legacy compatibility on the Mac dmd compiler.

I was concerned that people would see "darwin" support and wonder what that is. OSX is an order of magnitude better known and associated with Apple. Macs are not called "darwins". I suspect we'd get real tired of saying "yes, darwin really means OSX."

(As an aside, back in the 80's the ubiquitous and famous Wordstar program was produced by Micropro. Nobody could ever remember the company name. After many years of people assuming that Wordstar was made by Wordstar Inc. and fruitlessly trying to find Wordstar Inc., Micropro finally wised up and changed their name to Wordstar Inc.

Also, note that most bands put out their first CD as a self-titled one.)

Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
> And if not, why is there no Linux ? This is the obvious reason for
> GDC/LDC pick the lowercase identifiers in the first place ...

Because gcc on linux predefines "linux", not "Linux".

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Walter Bright <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
>>
>> And if not, why is there no Linux ? This is the obvious reason for GDC/LDC pick the lowercase identifiers in the first place ...
>
> Because gcc on linux predefines "linux", not "Linux".
>

It seems somewhat arbitrary, but fair enough..

Walter Bright wrote:
> Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
>> And if not, why is there no Linux ? This is the obvious reason for
>> GDC/LDC pick the lowercase identifiers in the first place ...
> 
> Because gcc on linux predefines "linux", not "Linux".

I wouldn't consider this consistent, some version identifiers are named    after how it's written in the literature and some after what gcc predefines.

Walter Bright wrote:
> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>>> Now works for FreeBSD 7.1!
>>
>> Nice!
>>
>> But is there a particularly good reason for disregarding version identifiers already established by gdc and ldc?
>>
>> freebsd vs FreeBSD, darwin vs OSX
> 
> FreeBSD is how it is normally written in the official FreeBSD literature, such as : http://www.freebsd.org/

If you follow what's normally written in the official literature and documentation shouldn't it be "MacOSX" then?

> Also, gcc on FreeBSD predefines __FreeBSD__
> 
> Clearly, FreeBSD is the term preferred by the FreeBSD community.
> 
> The Mac OSX documentation does not refer to it as darwin, it normally refers to it as OSX. You have to work hard to find any references to darwin on the Apple web site. Nevertheless, "darwin" is predefined for legacy compatibility on the Mac dmd compiler.

It depends on what documentation you read. http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Darwin/index.html
In this documentation "Darwin" is all over the place.

> I was concerned that people would see "darwin" support and wonder what that is. OSX is an order of magnitude better known and associated with Apple. Macs are not called "darwins". I suspect we'd get real tired of saying "yes, darwin really means OSX."
> 
> (As an aside, back in the 80's the ubiquitous and famous Wordstar program was produced by Micropro. Nobody could ever remember the company name. After many years of people assuming that Wordstar was made by Wordstar Inc. and fruitlessly trying to find Wordstar Inc., Micropro finally wised up and changed their name to Wordstar Inc.
> 
> Also, note that most bands put out their first CD as a self-titled one.)
> 

And can't we just have all the version identifiers in lowercase.

Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Walter Bright
> <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>> Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
>>> And if not, why is there no Linux ? This is the obvious reason for
>>> GDC/LDC pick the lowercase identifiers in the first place ...
>> Because gcc on linux predefines "linux", not "Linux".
>>
> 
> It seems somewhat arbitrary, but fair enough..

It's just one less thing to remember when switching between C and D.