Meson support for Mir and Lubeck

[Russel Winder]

On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 07:25 +0000, 9il via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[…]

> Interesting, maybe we can go forward with D specific libraries in 
> the future. Is there any D library that is used by application 
> packages?

Obvious example is Tilix and GtkD. They are compiled with a given version of
LDC (and hence Phobos and Druntime). Even if LDC is upgraded, as it just has
been, the Druntime and Phobos required by Tilix and GtkD are still there so
nothing breaks.

This doesn't mean it is all plain sailing: trying to use the updated LDC with
the not yet updated GtkD leads to two versions of Phobos seeming to be
required. Code still works though.

> Mir Optim can be easily used by other libraries and languages, 
> developers don't need to know D at all as well as depend on 
> DRuntime and D compiler.
> 
> The problem with Compiler/DRuntime version that it seems like 
> that if, for example one man released library A that is depend on 
> DRuntime v1, and other man released library B that depends on 
> DRuntime v2, how can I use them in my project together if this 
> DRuntimes are not compatible at ABI level? Maybe we can link 
> dynamically them together, but how GC will work then (in case of 
> non BetterC library)?

Pass. All I have evidence for is that I am compiling D code with LDC 1.11.0
which requires Phobos and Druntime 2.082 linking with GtkD which required
Phobos 2.078 and it all just works.

> If a solution of this issue exist, I would be very surprised if 
> it is easy to go solution. betterC libraries with fixed ABI, and 
> C/C++ API looks to me like a right way to develop D packages for 
> Debian.

Possibly, but much better to go with what is simplest and most efficacious for
the purpose in the context.  Libraries destined for use by many different
languages clearly need to use the C linkage of the moment.

It is mooted that some currently C implemented libraries may be reimplemented
in Rust, but will offer a C linkage as nothing else makes sense. 

[…]
> 
> We can choose other library prefix for packages instead of "mir", 
> say "mirmodule", so it would be libmirmodule-optim. Would this 
> work? I don't have resource to rename all mir and dependencies.

I wonder if this is all a storm in a teacup. As far as I can tell there is no
libmir, libmir-optim, libmir-dev, or libmir-optim-dev on Debian, so get in
there quick before something changes.

On Ubuntu the libraries for Mir the Canonical display server are libmiral… or
libmirclient… so there is no actual clash of package name as yet.


-- 
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d-announce/attachments/20180910/f49643b7/attachment.sig>