'Build' utility must have a new name.

David L. Davis SpottedTiger at yahoo.com
Sun Jul 30 12:38:43 PDT 2006


"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 at yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:eaiqns$1760$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
> David L. Davis wrote:
>> Here's a few more suggestions:
>>
>> dmdbuild - Digital Mars D Build(er)
> <snip>
>
> Can't it use GDC instead of DMD?  To make it compatible with as many D 
> compilers as possible would be a good course of action for the future, 
> thereby warranting a compiler-neutral name.
>
> Stewart.
>
> -- 
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCS/M d- s:-@ C++@ a->--- UB@ P+ L E@ W++@ N+++ o K-@ w++@ O? M V? PS- PE- 
> Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++++ h-- r-- !y
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>
> My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on the 
> 'group where everyone may benefit.

Stewart, roger that...I agree with your point! That's why everyone, myself 
included are mainly looking at "dbuild" as the new name.

dmdbuild - this suggestion is now changed to "dobuild", for D Object 
Build(er)  - the name is a bit catchier! :)

Also, forgive me for my lack of knowledge in this area (because I've only 
used WinXP and DMD), but what is the executable name of D with the GDC 
compiler, is it named something like gdc.exe?

Thanks in advance for your reply,
David L.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dare to reach for the Stars...Dare to Dream, Build, and Achieve!"
-------------------------------------------------------------------

MKoD: http://spottedtiger.tripod.com/D_Language/D_Main_XP.html 





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list