[OT] Windows dying

[Jerry]

On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 at 23:04:09 UTC, bauss wrote:
> On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 at 20:44:57 UTC, Jerry wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 at 19:10:50 UTC, bauss wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 1 November 2017 at 18:59:21 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, 1 November 2017 at 18:42:07 UTC, Bo wrote:
>>>>> There is a issue with Windows. The whole attacking the 
>>>>> messenger, the whole idiotic argumentation's that Windows 
>>>>> is dying, it is all pure useless trolling the people who 
>>>>> ask a simple questions: How to solve the D 64bit issue so 
>>>>> that like on the Linux or OSx platform, the users can have 
>>>>> the SAME level of consistency.
>>>>
>>>> Windows 32 bit is the special one - it is the ONLY platform 
>>>> where D works out of the box without additional downloads. 
>>>> That's one reason why I advocate it for just playing around 
>>>> - it just works.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes i works when toying around, but as soon as you want to 
>>> write actual software then you can't write 32 bit anymore, 
>>> because OPTLINK is just too buggy and will end up not being 
>>> able to link your code correctly.
>>>
>>> A good example is that mysql-native currently don't link 
>>> properly with OPTLINK. It might link for some, but at least 
>>> for me; I'm forced to either use an older compiler or compile 
>>> to 64 bit.
>>>
>>> See:
>>> https://github.com/mysql-d/mysql-native/issues/100
>>>
>>> There's also reported issues like this one:
>>> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15183
>>>
>>> I'm aware that issues like these should be reported more 
>>> often and as soon as they're discovered, but they're also 
>>> hard to report, because you get virtually no information 
>>> about what's wrong and you can only guess by commenting out 
>>> sections of your code until it will link.
>>>
>>> That's not ideal.
>>>
>>> I'm sure many other similar issues exists.
>>>
>>> Yes, 32 bit development with D is easy on Windows, but only 
>>> for toying around; which is no reason to defend it.
>>
>> You can use -m32mscoff for 32-bit, which uses Visual Studio 
>> like the 64-bit version. I've been saying OPTLINK should be 
>> removed. Even if you report a bug for optlink, it's never 
>> going to get fixed. No one's stupid enough to go digging 
>> through that spaghetti code dump. If you're luck, some 
>> limitation might introduced to DMD that won't cause the bug in 
>> OPTLINK to trigger. That's why it shouldn't be supported 
>> anymore, it's hindering DMD, not making it better.
>>
>> It's amazing how many people are so lazy to download Visual 
>> Studio, and some of the stupidest reason for not wanting to 
>> download it to boot.
>
> It's not that people don't want to get Visual Studio, but some 
> people have limited space.
>
> Ex. until a few months ago I was actually developing all my 
> stuff on a Windows tablet which only had 30gb of space (The OS 
> etc. also took of those 30 gb.) It would have been impossible 
> for me to get Visual Studio on it, at least if I wanted to use 
> it for anything else.
>
> Of course it's not a problem for me at the moment as I have a 
> laptop, but at the time it was the only thing I had. At least I 
> didn't get by any bugs in OPTLINK back then, else it would have 
> been impossible for me to actually write D code.

Well a tablet isn't really for development. Even a cheap laptop 
would be better for development. You can't really do much of 
anything with that little space. I don't think the focus should 
be people with niche development hardware like tablets. If you do 
enough CTFE the RAM usage of DMD shoots through the roof and 
you'd end up not having enough RAM to compile anyways. Let alone 
if you have enough ram but still use the 32-bit version of DMD 
and hit that limit.