DMD 1.022 and 2.005 releases

[Bruce Adams]

Walter Bright Wrote:

> Bruce Adams wrote:
> > I was going to post a similar question. I do most of my development
> > via gcc. I'm only using DMD on windows rather than gdc because its
> > more reliable (relative to the current state of gdc on cygwin). I
> > have a lot of current C++ code working under gcc which is one thing
> > holding me back from adopting D wholesale. A way of supporting gcc
> > style name mangling as opposed to M$ would be very useful.
> 
> Supporting gcc name mangling isn't enough, as dmd on Windows doesn't 
> generate ELF and is incompatible with gcc on many levels.
> 
> A more practical approach is to recompile your C++ source using DMC++.

I doubt it is that practical. Though perhaps worth a try. gcc its well integrated with my build system and I keep my code portable between windows and linux. It sounds like I'm out of luck there :(.
It was hard enough to persuade myself to try dmd when gdc didn't work for me. I know gcc's interface backwards. Jumping to another vendor (even you :-) is just a little step too far for me. Not to mention having to swap gdb for ddbg or whatever it is. I might try porting something simple as an exercise in improving the portability of some code just to see what happens. As Captain Oates said, I may be some time...

Bruce.