I do believe I saw a new release mentioned in announcements. So this will be a priority to get done first and finished as soon as possible.

Regards
Iain.

On 18 February 2013 08:16, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> wrote:

> I do believe I saw a new release mentioned in announcements. So this will be a priority to get done first and finished as soon as possible.
>
> Regards
> Iain.
>

Once again, this is proving to be an [expletive] pain.  I know Walter has been tying to help out with refactoring code, but it touches very sensitive areas that break easily.   I have it in the works to replace these areas in gdc (see thread on removing toobj, typinf, and todt) - but it looks like things will be worse before they start improving again on this instance.


-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 at 11:33:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 18 February 2013 08:16, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>   I have it in the works to replace these areas in
> gdc (see thread on removing toobj, typinf, and todt) - but it looks like
> things will be worse before they start improving again on this instance.

Won't be better to merge rather smaller increments? For example,
merging one commit (from dmd) at a time?

That way, the gdc will follow the dmd commit by commit, and not
only release by release. I hope this would bring easier merging,
as less code changes are required.

What do you think?

On 20 February 2013 08:05, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 at 11:33:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
>> On 18 February 2013 08:16, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>   I have it in the works to replace these areas in
>> gdc (see thread on removing toobj, typinf, and todt) - but it looks like
>> things will be worse before they start improving again on this instance.
>>
>
> Won't be better to merge rather smaller increments? For example, merging one commit (from dmd) at a time?
>
> That way, the gdc will follow the dmd commit by commit, and not only release by release. I hope this would bring easier merging, as less code changes are required.
>
> What do you think?
>

That's mid to long term goal  (we currently do the same with gcc development, for instance).  But not until have dropped the remainder dmd backend dependencies from the frontend.


Regards
-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

On 20 February 2013 11:24, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> wrote:

> On 20 February 2013 08:05, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 at 11:33:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>>> On 18 February 2013 08:16, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>>   I have it in the works to replace these areas in
>>> gdc (see thread on removing toobj, typinf, and todt) - but it looks like
>>> things will be worse before they start improving again on this instance.
>>>
>>
>> Won't be better to merge rather smaller increments? For example, merging one commit (from dmd) at a time?
>>
>> That way, the gdc will follow the dmd commit by commit, and not only release by release. I hope this would bring easier merging, as less code changes are required.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>
> That's mid to long term goal  (we currently do the same with gcc development, for instance).  But not until have dropped the remainder dmd backend dependencies from the frontend.
>
>

OK, D Frontend is merged.  Phobos and Druntime are yet to be updated, so subsequently it doesn't yet build the library yet.

TODO:
- Add compiler support for new cent/ucent types.
- Test CTFE feature for doing reinterpret casts between int <-> float.
Should work, but untested.
- Phobos / D runtime merge, obviously...
- Once above done, blast through re-implementation of toDt, toObjFile
routines that removes all dependencies on DMD backend.
- Breathe and sigh.


Regards
-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

On 20 February 2013 18:27, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> wrote:

> On 20 February 2013 11:24, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
>> On 20 February 2013 08:05, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 at 11:33:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18 February 2013 08:16, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>>>   I have it in the works to replace these areas in
>>>> gdc (see thread on removing toobj, typinf, and todt) - but it looks like
>>>> things will be worse before they start improving again on this instance.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Won't be better to merge rather smaller increments? For example, merging one commit (from dmd) at a time?
>>>
>>> That way, the gdc will follow the dmd commit by commit, and not only release by release. I hope this would bring easier merging, as less code changes are required.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>
>> That's mid to long term goal  (we currently do the same with gcc development, for instance).  But not until have dropped the remainder dmd backend dependencies from the frontend.
>>
>>
>
> OK, D Frontend is merged.  Phobos and Druntime are yet to be updated, so subsequently it doesn't yet build the library yet.
>
> TODO:
> - Add compiler support for new cent/ucent types.
> - Test CTFE feature for doing reinterpret casts between int <-> float.
> Should work, but untested.
> - Phobos / D runtime merge, obviously...
> - Once above done, blast through re-implementation of toDt, toObjFile
> routines that removes all dependencies on DMD backend.
> - Breathe and sigh.
>
>
Phobos/Druntime merged.

TODO:
- cent/ucent
- Test CTFE
- re-implementation of toDt, toObjFile.



-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';