On Monday, 3 February 2014 at 18:54:49 UTC, evilrat wrote:
> On Monday, 3 February 2014 at 18:37:20 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote:
>> Windows users, please give the new installer a try. It has been updated to facilitate proper installation.
>
> vc2013/win 8.1/winsdk 8.1
> detects visual studio correctly, path to win sdk correctly.
>
> has wrong path to mspdb120.dll, current:
> PATH=%PATH%;%VCINSTALLDIR%\bin\x86_amd64;%VCINSTALLDIR%\..\Common7\IDE
> should be:
> PATH=%PATH%;%VCINSTALLDIR%\bin;%VCINSTALLDIR%\..\Common7\IDE
>
> has no path to libs dir for sdk 8.1, should be:
> ; Platform libraries (Windows SDK 8.1)
> LIB=%LIB%;"%WindowsSdkDir%\Lib\winv6.3\um\x64"
>
> after these changes all seems to be working.

These steps were required for me as well, VS 2013 and Windows 8.1.

I gave beta 3 on my win32 dev machine a try today and noticed that building vibe.d (a dependancy in almost all my projects) takes noticeably longer to built. observing the process shows that beta3 consumes almost 1.5GB of RAM while dmd 2.064 'just' uses 1GB.

On 02/10/2014 10:24 PM, extrawurst wrote:
> I gave beta 3 on my win32 dev machine a try today and noticed that
> building vibe.d (a dependancy in almost all my projects) takes
> noticeably longer to built. observing the process shows that beta3
> consumes almost 1.5GB of RAM while dmd 2.064 'just' uses 1GB.

Is this optimized?

I had the impression that compiling diet templates in optimized builds now takes much longer, but I might be wrong.

On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 03:37:52 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> On 02/10/2014 10:24 PM, extrawurst wrote:
>> I gave beta 3 on my win32 dev machine a try today and noticed that
>> building vibe.d (a dependancy in almost all my projects) takes
>> noticeably longer to built. observing the process shows that beta3
>> consumes almost 1.5GB of RAM while dmd 2.064 'just' uses 1GB.
>
> Is this optimized?
>
> I had the impression that compiling diet templates in optimized builds now takes much longer, but I might be wrong.

No no optimization enabled and I am also not using any diet templates. It happens here on win32 even with the smallest example that vibe.d provides...

Am 10.02.2014 22:24, schrieb extrawurst:
> I gave beta 3 on my win32 dev machine a try today and noticed that
> building vibe.d (a dependancy in almost all my projects) takes
> noticeably longer to built. observing the process shows that beta3
> consumes almost 1.5GB of RAM while dmd 2.064 'just' uses 1GB.

https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12137