Up to date documentation on D implementation.

[Dmitry Olshansky]

On 07.04.2012 8:51, ReneSac wrote:
> On Friday, 6 April 2012 at 01:33:10 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
>> DMD runs just fine on 64-bit Windows.
> Then why "32 bit Windows (Win32) operating system, such as Windows XP"
> is put as a requirement? This should be corrected:
> http://dlang.org/dmd-windows.html
>
> Anyway, in the mean time I have setup GDC using the latest binaries, and
> it is working well.
>
> The only thing I noticed is that a simple "Hello World" took several
> seconds to compile, and ended up with 1.25MB (release, non-debug build)!

how about strip it?
+ MinGW debug info is notoriously bloated (if it was debug build).

> And I thought that D was fast to compile... But then I discovered that
> switching to std.c.stdio made the compilation almost instantaneous, and
> the executable size a slightly more reasonable 408KB. It works, but that
> isn't really an option, as D strings aren't readily compatible with C
> strings...
>
> I know that the lower limiter in binary size is higher, due to the
> statically compiled runtime, but this "bloat" in the std lib for a
> single function worries me a bit. Is DMD better in this measurement, or
> is it a limitation of the current D libraries?
>
> This may be kinda important latter, as in compression benchmarks, the
> decompressor size is added in the compressed size to prevent cheating. I
> don't want a multi-megabyte executable size.
>


-- 
Dmitry Olshansky