DMD - Windows

[Manu]

On 7 January 2012 10:40, Adam Wilson <flyboynw at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 06 Jan 2012 23:31:52 -0800, torhu <no at spam.invalid> wrote:
>
>  On 06.01.2012 21:02, Adam Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> COFF is an absolute requirements when working on Windows, yet DMD doesn't
>>> support it. Everything, every programming interface, every application
>>> running on x64 Windows is built with COFF, the default output of every
>>> other compiler on Windows is COFF, everyone else programming on Windows
>>> is
>>> expecting COFF.
>>> Windows represents the largest OS install base in the world; and yet,
>>> Windows based D programmers are told that they have to dig up extremely
>>> esoteric tools from the darkest, smelliest, most cobwebbed corners of the
>>> Internet, just to be able to interact with the the rest of the Windows
>>> world.
>>>
>>> This situation is simply unacceptable.
>>>
>>
>> It's not that bad.  Most libraries can be compiled to DLL files, in fact
>> that's often the default.  DMD/Optlink can use DLL files created by other
>> tool chains just fine. If an import library in the correct format is not
>> available, just use implib or coffimplib to create one.  No problem.
>>
>
> First of all, what if I want to use a DLL lib file that was created by DMD
> in VC++? Oh right, can't do that either. I know there are converter tools
> available, but all of them are closed source, and what if the creator
> decides one day that he is done? I'm stuck with no source and potential
> bugs.
> Second, as a professional, the idea that somehow the advice to download
> Esoteric Tool X from Shady FTP Server Y is acceptable is completely beyond
> me. No professional compiler implementation would DARE give that advice to
> it's clients, they'd laugh and find another compiler that did what they
> want. The concept of kludging together a build toolchain is uniquely open
> source. DMD will never get buy-in from large groups of professionals
> without natively supporting the things those professionals expect.
>
> Let me state that again for clarity. If DMD does not natively support the
> standard outputs that professionals have come to expect and demand, then
> DMD will forever remain a hobby toy.
>
> Professionals don't have time to kludge together a [fragile] build
> toolchain and support it, they have work to do. Given the choice for a
> large project right now, i'd have to say VC++ wins on Windows every time,
> it's got COFF, excellent tooling and libraries, and x64 support; but
> mostly, it works with everything Windows. DMD does not. Until DMD does,
> professionals cannot seriously consider DMD.


Hear, hear!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20120107/6d8e4c39/attachment.html>