Bill Baxter wrote:
> Some of those FAQs need updating:
> * Why doesn't D have an interface to C++ as well as C?
> * Why cannot D code directly call existing C++ code?
> 
> 
> Both should mention D2.0's C++ interfacing capabilities. (with link to here http://www.digitalmars.com/d/cpp_interface.html)

Done.

Walter Bright wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Some of those FAQs need updating:
>> * Why doesn't D have an interface to C++ as well as C?
>> * Why cannot D code directly call existing C++ code?
>>
>>
>> Both should mention D2.0's C++ interfacing capabilities. (with link to here http://www.digitalmars.com/d/cpp_interface.html)
> 
> Done.

One more thing:
"Doesn't C++ support strings, bit arrays, etc. with STL?"..."How much confidence can you have that this [std::string] is all working correctly, how do you fix it if it is not?"

The "how do you fix it?" argument applies even moreso to a built-in implementation of string than a library one.  So I'd strike that bit.

--bb

Bill Baxter wrote:

> Lionello Lunesu wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> guslay wrote:
>>>> I would appreciate if Walter or maybe someone who assisted to the D conference could enlight me.
>>>
>>> This is clearly a frequently asked question, so I added it to the FAQ:
>>>
>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html#const
>> 
>> Small thing: "of little import" should probably read "of little importance"?
> 
> It's valid English.  The meaning is the same.
> 
> --bb

Not all native english speakers recognize that as valid english (take me for example).  It's probably better to use the more common wording to avoid people thinking it's poorly worded.

Jason House wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
> 
>> Lionello Lunesu wrote:
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> guslay wrote:
>>>>> I would appreciate if Walter or maybe someone who assisted to the D
>>>>> conference could enlight me.
>>>> This is clearly a frequently asked question, so I added it to the FAQ:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html#const
>>> Small thing: "of little import" should probably read "of little
>>> importance"?
>> It's valid English.  The meaning is the same.
>>
>> --bb
> 
> Not all native english speakers recognize that as valid english (take me for
> example).  It's probably better to use the more common wording to avoid
> people thinking it's poorly worded.

Yeh true.  Effective communication is all about considering your target audience.

--bb

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 03:51:28 -0000, Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup@billbaxter.com> wrote:

> Jason House wrote:
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>>> Lionello Lunesu wrote:
>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>> guslay wrote:
>>>>>> I would appreciate if Walter or maybe someone who assisted to the D
>>>>>> conference could enlight me.
>>>>> This is clearly a frequently asked question, so I added it to the FAQ:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html#const
>>>> Small thing: "of little import" should probably read "of little
>>>> importance"?
>>> It's valid English.  The meaning is the same.
>>>
>>> --bb
>>  Not all native english speakers recognize that as valid english (take me for
>> example).  It's probably better to use the more common wording to avoid
>> people thinking it's poorly worded.
>
> Yeh true.  Effective communication is all about considering your target audience.
>
> --bb

I'd hate to be stuck with a less rich vocabularly to suit the lowest common denominator.
(me no like less words to make simple)

Wikipedia has an interesting approach. There's a simplified form of English as a distinct language/translation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_English

On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:38:51 -0000, Walter Bright <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Some of those FAQs need updating:
>> * Why doesn't D have an interface to C++ as well as C?
>> * Why cannot D code directly call existing C++ code?
>>   Both should mention D2.0's C++ interfacing capabilities. (with link to here http://www.digitalmars.com/d/cpp_interface.html)
>
> Done.

can I ask, which compiler combinations does interfacing work with? is it just
when the executable formats are the same?

BC wrote:
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>> Some of those FAQs need updating:
>>> * Why doesn't D have an interface to C++ as well as C?
>>> * Why cannot D code directly call existing C++ code?
>>>   Both should mention D2.0's C++ interfacing capabilities. (with link to here http://www.digitalmars.com/d/cpp_interface.html)
> 
> can I ask, which compiler combinations does interfacing work with? is it just
> when the executable formats are the same?

DMD on Windows is compatible with DMC.
DMD on Linux is compatible with some version of g++ (not sure which one).
GDC should be compatible with g++ from the same version.

The ones that are compatible with some version of g++ should also be compatible with "similar" g++ versions and IIRC the Intel C++ compiler on Linux (perhaps depending on version of g++ and icc).