What's left for 1.0?

[Craig Black]

"Craig Black" <cblack at ara.com> wrote in message 
news:eji8g0$2dpp$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Pragma" <ericanderton at yahoo.removeme.com> wrote in message 
> news:eji7vs$2cla$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
>> Craig Black wrote:
>>> This is not a 1.0 blocker, but it is a blocker my development.  D 
>>> doesn't have a good solution for cross-platform dynamic libraries.
>>
>> Out of curiosity, what feature set are you looking for when it comes to 
>> dynamic libs being "cross-platform"?  Are you looking for write-once, 
>> deploy everywhere, some other killer feature, or is just 
>> seamless/effortless compilation-per-platform good enough?
>
> Like I said, full class loading would be nice, but my requirement is what 
> C++ currently offers.  That is, I can compile the same code on Windows and 
> Linux and get a .dll and an .so that are linked at run-time.  I want to be 
> able to use an abstract class to interface to them.

BTW, I didn't mean to belittle DDL in any way.  Sorry if it seemed like that 
is what I was doing.  I might be able to use DDL instead of an abstract 
class if DDL worked in Linux.  However, I don't think this is currently 
possible since last I heard DMD didn't produce shared objects in linux. 
Correct me if I'm wrong.

-Craig