On Wednesday, 18 December 2013 at 14:30:12 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
This has been fixed to not call any library routines, but has
not been
backported to the 4.8 branch yet.
This is something that will be done before New Years (if my
list of
things to do does not grow even more...)
Iain,
Pri
On 21 December 2013 11:29, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> Am Sat, 21 Dec 2013 11:34:29 +0100
> schrieb "Mike" :
>
>>
>> > Should the module name then default to the file name?
>> > Is there a way to query and print the full module name at
>> > compile time?
>>
>> Good questions, I'd like to know these mys
Am Sat, 21 Dec 2013 11:34:29 +0100
schrieb "Mike" :
>
> > Should the module name then default to the file name?
> > Is there a way to query and print the full module name at
> > compile time?
>
> Good questions, I'd like to know these myself. Iain? Johannes?
It usually should default to the fi
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 10:14:18 UTC, Timo Sintonen
wrote:
Hi Mike,
the arm-old branch has a new frontend version (2.064), the
official
gdc-4.8 branch is at (2.063) but I'll push an update today.
Anyway, dmd 2.064 behaves the same way, it seems dmd 2.064 is
pickier
with object.d fi
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 09:35:33 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 08:51:11 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Am Sat, 21 Dec 2013 02:58:49 +0100
schrieb "Mike" :
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 00:07:17 UTC, Mike wrote:
I should probably add that if I remove my object.d file
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 08:51:11 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Am Sat, 21 Dec 2013 02:58:49 +0100
schrieb "Mike" :
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 00:07:17 UTC, Mike wrote:
I should probably add that if I remove my object.d file from
the file system, I get:
cc1d: error: cannot find so
Am Sat, 21 Dec 2013 02:58:49 +0100
schrieb "Mike" :
> On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 00:07:17 UTC, Mike wrote:
>
> I should probably add that if I remove my object.d file from the
> file system, I get:
>
> cc1d: error: cannot find source code for runtime library file
> 'object.d'
> cc1d: not
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 03:07:45 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 02:58:49AM +0100, Mike wrote:
[...]
I should probably add that if I remove my object.d file from
the
file system, I get:
cc1d: error: cannot find source code for runtime library file
'object.d'
cc1d: note:
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 02:58:49AM +0100, Mike wrote:
[...]
> I should probably add that if I remove my object.d file from the
> file system, I get:
>
> cc1d: error: cannot find source code for runtime library file
> 'object.d'
> cc1d: note: dmd might not be correctly installed. Run 'dmd -man' for
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 00:07:17 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 20 December 2013 at 20:18:43 UTC, Timo Sintonen
wrote:
Object.d seems to be a special case in many ways.
When building minlibd I was not able to have an empty or my
own object.d and it had to be named object_.d
I do not reme
On Friday, 20 December 2013 at 20:18:43 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
Object.d seems to be a special case in many ways.
When building minlibd I was not able to have an empty or my
own object.d and it had to be named object_.d
I do not remember any more what all the problems were.
Object.d (or .di)
On Friday, 20 December 2013 at 19:14:43 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Friday, 20 December 2013 at 15:03:52 UTC, Mike wrote:
Two questions:
1) These are defined in my object.d, so why is it saying only
object.d can define these types?
2) Why is there exactly two instances of each error message?
On Friday, 20 December 2013 at 15:03:52 UTC, Mike wrote:
Two questions:
1) These are defined in my object.d, so why is it saying only
object.d can define these types?
2) Why is there exactly two instances of each error message?
Again, here's my build line:
arm-none-eabi-gdc -march=armv7e-m -m
On Wednesday, 18 December 2013 at 15:17:34 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
I already have a personal branch with 2.064 backported to the
gcc-4.8
branch:
https://github.com/jpf91/GDC/commits/arm-old
Thanks Iain and Johannes,
I've built Johannes's arm-old branch, but I can't yet get to the
linke
On 18 December 2013 15:17, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> Am Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:29:57 +
> schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>
>>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> This has been fixed to not call any library routines, but has not been
>> backported to the 4.8 branch yet.
>>
>> This is something that will be done before New Years
On 18 December 2013 15:17, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> Am Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:29:57 +
> schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>
>>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> This has been fixed to not call any library routines, but has not been
>> backported to the 4.8 branch yet.
>>
>> This is something that will be done before New Years
Am Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:29:57 +
schrieb Iain Buclaw :
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> This has been fixed to not call any library routines, but has not been
> backported to the 4.8 branch yet.
>
> This is something that will be done before New Years (if my list of
> things to do does not grow even more...)
On Wednesday, 18 December 2013 at 14:31:31 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 18 December 2013 14:29, Daniel Kozak
wrote:
Is this a bug, by design, a temporary convenience? Please
advise and
offer your suggestions?
IMHO it is not a bug. Even static arrays are dynamically
allocated and then
con
IMHO it is not a bug. Even static arrays are dynamically
allocated and then convert to static.
I mean everytime when you write [something, something else, ...]
even if all members are known at compile time, it will create
dynamic array.
On 18 December 2013 14:29, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>
>> Is this a bug, by design, a temporary convenience? Please advise and
>> offer your suggestions?
>
>
> IMHO it is not a bug. Even static arrays are dynamically allocated and then
> convert to static.
>
Not anymore, they are not. It makes no sen
Is this a bug, by design, a temporary convenience? Please
advise and offer your suggestions?
IMHO it is not a bug. Even static arrays are dynamically
allocated and then convert to static.
You can write this:
uint[3] message;
message[0] = 2;
message[1] = cast(uint)"hello\r\n".ptr;
message[
On 18 December 2013 14:14, Mike wrote:
> I finally got a GDC cross-compiler built for the ARM Cortex-M, and it seems
> to generated executable code (code that can be executed). I'm working on
> getting a *very* minimal D runtime so I can run a simple semihosted hello
> world program as I did with
22 matches
Mail list logo
