www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - DMD 0.155 release

reply Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
Apr 28 2006
next sibling parent Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html



Walter, thank you!!

L.
Apr 28 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:


 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html



(or http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html#new0155,
to avoid all that scrolling when one reads this later...)


 # Removed std.recls, instead use http://synesis.com.au/software/recls/.



This will also avoid the C++ requirement for building Phobos,
while still allowing you to get a new version of recls later.

It also works around the "documentation issue" of std.recls.


Now all we need is an upgrade for zlib: 1.2.1 -> 1.2.3
http://www.zlib.net/zlib123.zip

I believe the current version has some security problems...
http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/238678
http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/680620
Or has these been patched in the DMD version of zlib 1.2.1 ?


But it looks like a solid update, let's see if we can
upgrade GDC with all of them since it's at DMD 140 now.

--anders
Apr 28 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Hasan Aljudy <hasan.aljudy gmail.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html



The attached windbg debugger is a little bit wierd.
Font is too small ... hard to see things.
When you open a "program", all the other "source" windows disappear.
Does't seem to see local variables very well?
Apr 28 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Wang Zhen <nehzgnaw gmail.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html



Thank you, Walter.
I hope you redistribute windbg in a separate package next time.
Apr 28 2006
next sibling parent Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> writes:
Wang Zhen wrote:

 Walter Bright wrote:

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html



 Thank you, Walter.
 I hope you redistribute windbg in a separate package next time.



It's the debugger everybody's been waiting for!(From 1996 nonetheless)

L.
Apr 28 2006
prev sibling parent reply Tydr Schnubbis <fake address.dude> writes:
Wang Zhen wrote:

 Walter Bright wrote:

 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html



 Thank you, Walter.
 I hope you redistribute windbg in a separate package next time.



The windbg that comes with dmd 0.155 is useless for me, because it runs 
so slow it looks like it hangs when I try to run an app with it.  I 
didn't change any of it's settings, so it doesn't seem to work out of 
the box for me.  Anyone else experienced this?

But windbg 6 (which I got from Microsoft's site) works fine most of the 
time.  What exactly am I missing out on by not using the old version?

I've only used it for debugging access violations so far, which seems to 
work.  And it opens the source code file and shows in which function the 
violation occurred.  Seems that line numbers might be missing, since it 
only show which function call (call stack), not the exact line in that 
function.

It would be really nice to have some recommandations for how to use 
windbg, pros and cons for each version etc.  Other than the windbg 6 
tutorial link ( 
http://mtaulty.com/blog/(e4b1ut55q0wf0545z043zsm5)/archive/2004/08/03/608.aspx 
).

Would be even nicer if the D runtime would print line numbers itself on 
access violations. Or a full stack trace. :)
Apr 29 2006
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
Tydr Schnubbis wrote:

 The windbg that comes with dmd 0.155 is useless for me, because it runs 
 so slow it looks like it hangs when I try to run an app with it.  I 
 didn't change any of it's settings, so it doesn't seem to work out of 
 the box for me.  Anyone else experienced this?



No. I use windbg all the time, and I have a old (slow) machine.


 But windbg 6 (which I got from Microsoft's site) works fine most of the 
 time.  What exactly am I missing out on by not using the old version?



Newer windbg's don't seem to support codeview 4 debug info, which is 
what dmd generates.


 Would be even nicer if the D runtime would print line numbers itself on 
 access violations. Or a full stack trace. :)



There's a patch to do that you can install.
Apr 29 2006
next sibling parent reply Tydr Schnubbis <fake address.dude> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 Tydr Schnubbis wrote:

 The windbg that comes with dmd 0.155 is useless for me, because it runs 
 so slow it looks like it hangs when I try to run an app with it.  I 
 didn't change any of it's settings, so it doesn't seem to work out of 
 the box for me.  Anyone else experienced this?



 No. I use windbg all the time, and I have a old (slow) machine.
 

 But windbg 6 (which I got from Microsoft's site) works fine most of the 
 time.  What exactly am I missing out on by not using the old version?



 Newer windbg's don't seem to support codeview 4 debug info, which is 
 what dmd generates.
 

 Would be even nicer if the D runtime would print line numbers itself on 
 access violations. Or a full stack trace. :)



 There's a patch to do that you can install.



I take it you mean this one:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/32313.html

It's for dmd 0.144, and seem to be some missings symbols from the later 
versions of phobos.  I hope the author will update it sometime.  Could 
be very handy.

I got this error:

debug\lib\pipestream.obj(pipestream)
  Error 42: Symbol Undefined _D3std6stream6Stream6isOpenFZx
debug\lib\pipestream.obj(pipestream)
  Error 42: Symbol Undefined _D3std6stream6Stream3eofFZx
debug\serverlist.obj(serverlist)
  Error 42: Symbol Undefined 
_D3std6thread6Thread5_ctorFDFZikZC3std6thread6Thread

--- errorlevel 3
Apr 30 2006
parent Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
Tydr Schnubbis wrote:

 I got this error:
 
 debug\lib\pipestream.obj(pipestream)
  Error 42: Symbol Undefined _D3std6stream6Stream6isOpenFZx
 debug\lib\pipestream.obj(pipestream)
  Error 42: Symbol Undefined _D3std6stream6Stream3eofFZx
 debug\serverlist.obj(serverlist)
  Error 42: Symbol Undefined 
 _D3std6thread6Thread5_ctorFDFZikZC3std6thread6Thread



recompiling the patch should do it.
Apr 30 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Don Clugston <dac nospam.com.au> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 Tydr Schnubbis wrote:

 The windbg that comes with dmd 0.155 is useless for me, because it 
 runs so slow it looks like it hangs when I try to run an app with it.  
 I didn't change any of it's settings, so it doesn't seem to work out 
 of the box for me.  Anyone else experienced this?



 No. I use windbg all the time, and I have a old (slow) machine.
 

 But windbg 6 (which I got from Microsoft's site) works fine most of 
 the time.  What exactly am I missing out on by not using the old version?



 Newer windbg's don't seem to support codeview 4 debug info, which is 
 what dmd generates.
 

 Would be even nicer if the D runtime would print line numbers itself 
 on access violations. Or a full stack trace. :)



 There's a patch to do that you can install.



Walter, is there any reason that the patch can't be incorporated into 
Phobos? Together with the -cov option (!), it does 99.9% of everything 
I've ever used a debugger for, and does it much more conveniently, too.
It's great to have windbug for the last 0.1%, of course.
May 02 2006
parent Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
Don Clugston wrote:

 Walter, is there any reason that the patch can't be incorporated into 
 Phobos? Together with the -cov option (!), it does 99.9% of everything 
 I've ever used a debugger for, and does it much more conveniently, too.
 It's great to have windbug for the last 0.1%, of course.



Sloth on my part.
May 02 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "ElfQT" <dethjunk yahoo.com> writes:
 Newer windbg's don't seem to support codeview 4 debug info, which is
 what dmd generates.



What about Visual Studio 2003?
I've tried it with my D code, and it seems to me that
it knows everything windbg knows.
I will look into this further... also with VS2005. I've just tried the
debugger that's all.

Also, is there some problem, maybe a known one, with try cathc blocks and
debugging.
With windbg, after an error in a try block, it didn't stepped into catch,
but signalled an exception. I this normal?
(I will check it with VS too.)

ElfQT
May 05 2006
parent reply "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:
"ElfQT" <dethjunk yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:e3ftla$1nec$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Newer windbg's don't seem to support codeview 4 debug info, which is
 what dmd generates.



 What about Visual Studio 2003?
 I've tried it with my D code, and it seems to me that
 it knows everything windbg knows.
 I will look into this further... also with VS2005. I've just tried the
 debugger that's all.



I've tried to debug external executables in VS2003, but it only seems to be 
able to attach to currently-running processes, making it useless for 
debugging most things (i.e. pretty much anything that's not a GUI app and 
which doesn't crash immediately).  Can you shed some light on this?

Instead, I use VS6, in which you can just open an EXE file, and start 
debugging it.
May 05 2006
next sibling parent reply pragma <pragma_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <e3g20i$1udh$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Jarrett Billingsley says...

"ElfQT" <dethjunk yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:e3ftla$1nec$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Newer windbg's don't seem to support codeview 4 debug info, which is
 what dmd generates.



 What about Visual Studio 2003?
 I've tried it with my D code, and it seems to me that
 it knows everything windbg knows.
 I will look into this further... also with VS2005. I've just tried the
 debugger that's all.



I've tried to debug external executables in VS2003, but it only seems to be 
able to attach to currently-running processes, making it useless for 
debugging most things (i.e. pretty much anything that's not a GUI app and 
which doesn't crash immediately).  Can you shed some light on this?

Instead, I use VS6, in which you can just open an EXE file, and start 
debugging it. 



I'm only familiar with VS6* myself, but I vaguely recall that it has a
properties panel for the current project, where you can set the EXE name to run
when debugging.  After setting it, the IDE just hooks that program into the
debugger when you start a debugging session.  Perhaps there's something similar
in the more recent versions of visual studio for this.

* - I really thing MS had it right with version 6.  Why they had to go and
change it up and make it resource hog is beyond me.

- EricAnderton at yahoo
May 05 2006
next sibling parent Ingle Thomas <Ingle_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <e3g3nc$213n$1 digitaldaemon.com>, pragma says...

In article <e3g20i$1udh$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Jarrett Billingsley says...

"ElfQT" <dethjunk yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:e3ftla$1nec$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Newer windbg's don't seem to support codeview 4 debug info, which is
 what dmd generates.



 What about Visual Studio 2003?
 I've tried it with my D code, and it seems to me that
 it knows everything windbg knows.
 I will look into this further... also with VS2005. I've just tried the
 debugger that's all.



I've tried to debug external executables in VS2003, but it only seems to be 
able to attach to currently-running processes, making it useless for 
debugging most things (i.e. pretty much anything that's not a GUI app and 
which doesn't crash immediately).  Can you shed some light on this?

Instead, I use VS6, in which you can just open an EXE file, and start 
debugging it. 



I'm only familiar with VS6* myself, but I vaguely recall that it has a
properties panel for the current project, where you can set the EXE name to run
when debugging.  After setting it, the IDE just hooks that program into the
debugger when you start a debugging session.  Perhaps there's something similar
in the more recent versions of visual studio for this.

* - I really thing MS had it right with version 6.  Why they had to go and
change it up and make it resource hog is beyond me.

- EricAnderton at yahoo



I agree with you 100%. They broke visual studio. Why? .Net

Although I do have to admit vs 2005 is pretty nice if you have the horsepower to
run it.
May 06 2006
prev sibling parent Don Clugston <dac nospam.com.au> writes:
pragma wrote:

 In article <e3g20i$1udh$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Jarrett Billingsley says...

 "ElfQT" <dethjunk yahoo.com> wrote in message 
 news:e3ftla$1nec$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Newer windbg's don't seem to support codeview 4 debug info, which is
 what dmd generates.



 I've tried it with my D code, and it seems to me that
 it knows everything windbg knows.
 I will look into this further... also with VS2005. I've just tried the
 debugger that's all.



 able to attach to currently-running processes, making it useless for 
 debugging most things (i.e. pretty much anything that's not a GUI app and 
 which doesn't crash immediately).  Can you shed some light on this?

 Instead, I use VS6, in which you can just open an EXE file, and start 
 debugging it. 



 I'm only familiar with VS6* myself, but I vaguely recall that it has a
 properties panel for the current project, where you can set the EXE name to run
 when debugging.  After setting it, the IDE just hooks that program into the
 debugger when you start a debugging session.  Perhaps there's something similar
 in the more recent versions of visual studio for this.
 
 * - I really thing MS had it right with version 6.  Why they had to go and
 change it up and make it resource hog is beyond me.



Plus it moves your toolbars around mysteriously. I've never figured out 
what it's doing. Moving from VS6 to VS2003 was the biggest productivity 
mistake I ever made. Now with D, I'm enjoying using VS6 again.
I must confess, though, that my favourite Microsoft IDE was VC4. When 
you pressed F1, 'Help' came up in 0.2 seconds, and it didn't mention 
Visual Basic anywhere :-).
May 07 2006
prev sibling parent reply "news.digitalmars.com" <dethjunk yahoo.com> writes:
 I've tried to debug external executables in VS2003, but it only seems to
 be
 able to attach to currently-running processes, making it useless for
 debugging most things (i.e. pretty much anything that's not a GUI app and
 which doesn't crash immediately).  Can you shed some light on this?



Here's a samlpe VS2003 solution. Open, Build, set breakpoint, and press F5.

http://elfqt.synthetik.hu/szallit/D/D_DX_Tut05_Textures.zip

ElfQT
May 05 2006
parent reply "ElfQT" <dethjunk yahoo.com> writes:
 I've tried to debug external executables in VS2003, but it only seems to
 be
 able to attach to currently-running processes, making it useless for
 debugging most things (i.e. pretty much anything that's not a GUI app and
 which doesn't crash immediately).  Can you shed some light on this?



 Here's a samlpe VS2003 solution. Open, Build, set breakpoint, and press 
 F5.

 http://elfqt.synthetik.hu/szallit/D/D_DX_Tut05_Textures.zip



And here's a bare VS2003 solution.
http://elfqt.synthetik.hu/szallit/D/D_VS_sampleSln.zip
ElfQT
May 05 2006
parent "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:
"ElfQT" <dethjunk yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:e3gjc4$6t2$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 http://elfqt.synthetik.hu/szallit/D/D_DX_Tut05_Textures.zip



 And here's a bare VS2003 solution.
 http://elfqt.synthetik.hu/szallit/D/D_VS_sampleSln.zip



Those are pretty cool.  Thanks.  Although, I'll probably end up still using 
VS6, as I don't even have to create a new project to do it.
May 05 2006
prev sibling parent Tydr Schnubbis <fake address.dude> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 Tydr Schnubbis wrote:

 The windbg that comes with dmd 0.155 is useless for me, because it runs 
 so slow it looks like it hangs when I try to run an app with it.  I 
 didn't change any of it's settings, so it doesn't seem to work out of 
 the box for me.  Anyone else experienced this?



 No. I use windbg all the time, and I have a old (slow) machine.
 



doesn't work for me. I'm about to give up my project, because printf 
debugging takes ages...
May 05 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html



Awesome.  These fixes may be just enough to get Tuple working.  And the 
debugger to boot!  Thanks, Walter :-)


Sean
Apr 28 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Juan Jose Comellas <jcomellas gmail.com> writes:
This bug (crash in gcx.mark() when using several threads) should probably be
closed too:

http://d.puremagic.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114



Walter Bright wrote:


 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
Apr 28 2006
prev sibling parent Kyle Furlong <kylefurlong gmail.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html



You are as I always say, one of the men. (not THE man though, sorry)
Apr 28 2006