Compiling DMD on Windows: A journey of mystery and madness

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 08/21/2016 03:01 PM, Seb wrote:
> because (1) you need less documentation (just one file to document) and

Wouldn't it be better to optimize documentation for the reader instead 
of the writer? After all if reading is impaired, that's bound to make 
the maintainer unhappy even if she has fewer documents to maintain.

> (2) the single file will be more tested/bullet-proof.

How does that work? Aren't step-by-step documents "how to do this on 
Posix" and "how to do this for Windows" best tested in one environment 
at a time?

> Anyways sorry about mentioning it - I know that such (a) a change
> shouldn't be taken lightly and it also may cause additional troubles and

What troubles would there be? How were troubles taken into account when 
the document got modified from its initial Posix-only stance to the 
current state?

> (b) it isn't that related to the problem of the poster.

NX has noted the information is there, it's just lost exactly because 
the document is poorly structured. Is that plausible evidence against 
your assertion?

Please just fix it with no debate. It's mostly a matter of moving 
Windows-related stuff from this document to another, fresh document. I'm 
mulling over a big contract for the Foundation. Let me do what I do 
best. It's the third level this has gotten to my level of consciousness, 
and that's more than two times too many.


Thanks,

Andrei