Qt Creator and D

[Manu]

On 20 September 2013 23:22, Wyatt <wyatt.epp at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 07:16:09 UTC, Manu wrote:
>
>> [...]
>>
>> It needs a reasonable amount of support from the compiler and presumably
>> cooperation from the debugger too. If people have
>> never heard of it, chances are, it doesn't exist :(
>>
>>  Google has been hitting close to this:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=U98rhV6wONo<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U98rhV6wONo>(slides:
> http://llvm.org/devmtg/2012-**04-12/Slides/Manuel_Klimek.pdf<http://llvm.org/devmtg/2012-04-12/Slides/Manuel_Klimek.pdf>
> **)
> Lot of potential here, even for a die-hard Vim user like myself.


... I didn't see him mention it at all. However he did mention lots of
useful things.
It looks like finally there are some people interested in closing the gap
between VS.
Clang is a super exciting piece of C/C++ technology. Why is it that they
are so innovative when GCC is basically stagnant for ages?

 Mmmm, a concept that I've always found completely amazing actually. How is
>> it that Linux - truly an OS for developers
>> (certainly not for end-users) - can consistently be plagued by
>> the worst dev tools out there? Surely someone in the past 30-40
>> years get's frustrated at some stage, looks at what MS have
>> been doing for over a decade, and think "shit, that's awesome,
>> I'd like that too!". I'm actually amazed that MS managed to
>> invent it in the first place. You'd think that Linux should have
>> gotten to it first...
>>
>>  Part of this would seem to be the simple fact that the GNU
> toolchain is the de facto standard for working in Linux and other
> Unixen.  If you've ever encountered a GNU project's general
> attitude toward patches and ideas from "outsiders", the concerns
> presented in this SO answer might offer some clarity as to why
> it's taken so long:
> http://stackoverflow.com/a/**4440794/432364<http://stackoverflow.com/a/4440794/432364>


Sadly, I don't think that guy who responded actually knew much about it. He
was making it sound harder than it is, and most of the questions/problems
he raised are known and/or solved already by MS.
The point is, there's a perfectly good working example, and it's well
understood how it works. (but apparently he didn't read up on it at all)

In short: getting all the people involved to agree on answers to
> all these questions is sort of a hard problem.
> (Though it looks like "Fix-and-continue" was added to the GDB
> roadmap about a year ago:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/**cauldron2012?action=**AttachFile&do=get&target=*
> *jkratoch.pdf<http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cauldron2012?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=jkratoch.pdf>
> )


Huzzah! Better late than never I guess...
I'm actually wondering if the recent movement of ex-windows dev's towards
things like android/iphone/web/etc, is fueling a whole bunch of new voices
behind the rubbish *nix tooling.
A massive industry of users who have for the longest time been perfectly
happy with VS, are now having to find new tools for prevailing non-MS
platforms, and becoming frustrated in the process. (I can refer to rant's
and complaints from countless (ex-)colleagues, perhaps numbering well into
the hundreds)

 I agree, I'm really looking forward to what they bring to the table. I
>> expect it's a lot of work though... they have over a
>> decade of catching up to do.
>>
>>  Per the links above, they might be closer than it initially
> appears.  Of course, it's also a matter of integration and
> coordination across multiple projects.  There are, occasionally,
> advantages to monolithic vertically-integrated dictatorships.


LLVM would seem to have the best shot at it. Given the current trajectory,
I'm optimistic I can abandon VS in maybe 2-3 years...
Don't get me wrong, there's loads of things wrong with VS. I'm not married
to it, it's actually crap in lots of ways, but it just has so many
productivity features that I consider absolutely non-negotiable.
I prefer Clang/GCC the compilers right now. But VS is so much more than a
compiler.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20130921/ac33c51a/attachment-0001.html>