www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - LDC 1.24.0-beta1

reply kinke <noone nowhere.com> writes:
Glad to announce the first beta for LDC 1.24:

- Based on D 2.094.0+.
- Support for LLVM 11.
   The prebuilt packages use v11.0.0-rc4+, and the x86 packages 
newly include the LLVM backend for AMD GPUs.

Full release log and downloads: 
https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/tag/v1.24.0-beta1

Please help test, and thanks to all contributors & sponsors!
Oct 01
next sibling parent Guillaume Piolat <first.name gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 1 October 2020 at 18:04:35 UTC, kinke wrote:
 Glad to announce the first beta for LDC 1.24:

 - Based on D 2.094.0+.
 - Support for LLVM 11.
   The prebuilt packages use v11.0.0-rc4+, and the x86 packages 
 newly include the LLVM backend for AMD GPUs.

 Full release log and downloads: 
 https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/tag/v1.24.0-beta1

 Please help test, and thanks to all contributors & sponsors!
Thanks! Now supported by https://github.com/AuburnSounds/intel-intrinsics and tests pass. The new __vector conversion rules are cool and would hopefully avoid bugs. Not too sure about int being implicitly convertible to __vector(int[N]) but we also have that for static arrays it seems.
Oct 05
prev sibling parent reply aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 1 October 2020 at 18:04:35 UTC, kinke wrote:
 Glad to announce the first beta for LDC 1.24:

 - Based on D 2.094.0+.
 - Support for LLVM 11.
   The prebuilt packages use v11.0.0-rc4+, and the x86 packages 
 newly include the LLVM backend for AMD GPUs.

 Full release log and downloads: 
 https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/tag/v1.24.0-beta1

 Please help test, and thanks to all contributors & sponsors!
It would be convenient if you provided a .exe installer as well. Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual tinkering.
Oct 18
next sibling parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:40:53 UTC, aberba wrote:
 Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual tinkering.
You can simply unzip it and use it directly. That's the best way to use most D compilers actually, then any versions can live side by side without affecting each other.
Oct 18
parent reply aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:47:17 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:40:53 UTC, aberba wrote:
 Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual tinkering.
You can simply unzip it and use it directly. That's the best way to use most D compilers actually, then any versions can live side by side without affecting each other.
It's what I did and added to my system path...but that's if you know what you're doing. An installer just like dmd etc is what newbies are used to.
Oct 18
parent reply Bastiaan Veelo <Bastiaan Veelo.net> writes:
On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 23:07:26 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:47:17 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:40:53 UTC, aberba wrote:
 Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual 
 tinkering.
You can simply unzip it and use it directly. That's the best way to use most D compilers actually, then any versions can live side by side without affecting each other.
It's what I did and added to my system path...but that's if you know what you're doing. An installer just like dmd etc is what newbies are used to.
I'm not suggesting that this fills the need of newbies, but there is this: https://dlang.org/install.html. --Bastiaan.
Oct 19
parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 13:43:14 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
 I'm not suggesting that this fills the need of newbies, but 
 there is this: https://dlang.org/install.html.
Nobody should ever follow those terrible instructions, they leave you so fragile in the event of future updates, takes superuser install access, and just generally scatters crap. If anything that page should be marked like "FOR PACKAGE MAINTAINERS ONLY" (even then I wouldn't do it that way but at least that's a kinda valid use case) since no end user should ever mess with that. Just unzip it in place. Maybe add it to your PATH if that's your thing. But don't go scattering files, you'll regret it when it comes update time.
Oct 19
parent reply Paul Backus <snarwin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 13:59:42 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 13:43:14 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo 
 wrote:
 I'm not suggesting that this fills the need of newbies, but 
 there is this: https://dlang.org/install.html.
Nobody should ever follow those terrible instructions, they leave you so fragile in the event of future updates, takes superuser install access, and just generally scatters crap.
Are we looking at the same instructions? The ones I see at that URL don't require superuser access and install everything to a self-contained directory in the user's $HOME. It's pretty much exactly what you recommend, with a bit of extra automation.
Oct 19
parent Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 14:20:02 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
 Are we looking at the same instructions?
aaaaah i mixed it up with https://dlang.org/dmd-linux.html#installation in my brain without clicking the link :( sorry my bad those are ok.
Oct 19
prev sibling parent reply notna <notna.remove.this ist-einmalig.de> writes:
On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:40:53 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It would be convenient if you provided a .exe installer as 
 well. Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual 
 tinkering.
use scoop for Windows package mgmt in a user context. build with developers in mind. for installation see: https://scoop.sh/ simple as: * scoop install dmd * scoop install ldc stay always up to date: * scoop update * scoop update * ... and MUCH more, see https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki
Oct 19
next sibling parent reply Andre Pany <andre s-e-a-p.de> writes:
On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 18:48:11 UTC, notna wrote:
 On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:40:53 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It would be convenient if you provided a .exe installer as 
 well. Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual 
 tinkering.
use scoop for Windows package mgmt in a user context. build with developers in mind. for installation see: https://scoop.sh/ simple as: * scoop install dmd * scoop install ldc stay always up to date: * scoop update * scoop update * ... and MUCH more, see https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki
Also Microsoft is working on a package manager which might be an option in the future https://docs.microsoft.com/de-de/windows/package-manager/ Kind regards Andre
Oct 19
next sibling parent Basile B. <b2.temp gmx.com> writes:
On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 20:49:14 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
 On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 18:48:11 UTC, notna wrote:
 On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:40:53 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It would be convenient if you provided a .exe installer as 
 well. Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual 
 tinkering.
use scoop for Windows package mgmt in a user context. build with developers in mind. for installation see: https://scoop.sh/ simple as: * scoop install dmd * scoop install ldc stay always up to date: * scoop update * scoop update * ... and MUCH more, see https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki
Also Microsoft is working on a package manager which might be an option in the future https://docs.microsoft.com/de-de/windows/package-manager/ Kind regards Andre
Looks a bit like "classic MS". Instead of buying something similar that exists they do their own.
Oct 20
prev sibling parent aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 20:49:14 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
 On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 18:48:11 UTC, notna wrote:
 On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:40:53 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It would be convenient if you provided a .exe installer as 
 well. Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual 
 tinkering.
use scoop for Windows package mgmt in a user context. build with developers in mind. for installation see: https://scoop.sh/ simple as: * scoop install dmd * scoop install ldc stay always up to date: * scoop update * scoop update * ... and MUCH more, see https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki
Also Microsoft is working on a package manager which might be an option in the future https://docs.microsoft.com/de-de/windows/package-manager/ Kind regards Andre
Yes, I have it (winget) installed. Still, the absence of an exe means its more convenient to just use DMD. Unfortunately some dev have decided to not get their stuff to work on DMD. DMD is an easy get-go. No thinkering needed.
Oct 20
prev sibling parent reply aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 19 October 2020 at 18:48:11 UTC, notna wrote:
 On Sunday, 18 October 2020 at 22:40:53 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It would be convenient if you provided a .exe installer as 
 well. Not sure what to do with the .7z file without manual 
 tinkering.
use scoop for Windows package mgmt in a user context. build with developers in mind. for installation see: https://scoop.sh/ simple as: * scoop install dmd * scoop install ldc stay always up to date: * scoop update * scoop update * ... and MUCH more, see https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki
It's an option but doesn't fill the need for an installer. Not sure why its hasn't been done.
Oct 20
parent reply kinke <noone nowhere.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 16:08:47 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It's an option but doesn't fill the need for an installer. Not 
 sure why its hasn't been done.
See https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/1754. I personally never download the DMD installers, only the .7z. I also don't use a global PATH set up to point to a particular LDC installation. I expect the vast majority of Windows *devs* to prefer a simple download&unpack over some installer. Those wanting to click through setup steps can use the VisualD installer with bundled LDC.
Oct 20
next sibling parent jmh530 <john.michael.hall gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 17:36:11 UTC, kinke wrote:
 [snip]

 See https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/1754. I 
 personally never download the DMD installers, only the .7z. I 
 also don't use a global PATH set up to point to a particular 
 LDC installation. I expect the vast majority of Windows *devs* 
 to prefer a simple download&unpack over some installer. Those 
 wanting to click through setup steps can use the VisualD 
 installer with bundled LDC.
I'm sympathetic to Ilya's concerns in that thread, but it would help to get empirical. What about a calculation of the number of unique downloads for DMD's Windows installer vs. those who download the .7z? The .7z probably has more downloads for CIs, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is a larger share of people downloading the DMD installer than you think. I also have a PATH set up to point to a particular LDC installation that I need to update whenever I upgrade LDC. It has caused me problems in the past when I forget to change it... I don't recall ever using the VisualD installer to install LDC.
Oct 20
prev sibling next sibling parent reply aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 17:36:11 UTC, kinke wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 16:08:47 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It's an option but doesn't fill the need for an installer. Not 
 sure why its hasn't been done.
See https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/1754. I personally never download the DMD installers, only the .7z. I also don't use a global PATH set up to point to a particular LDC installation. I expect the vast majority of Windows *devs* to prefer a simple download&unpack over some installer. Those wanting to click through setup steps can use the VisualD installer with bundled LDC.
Supposing I'm new to D, I have previous experience with LLVM-based compilers so I prefer to use LDC. How am I supposed to know what to do? Where is the information on how to get it on my system through visualD installer? The LDC experience needs some improvement here.
Oct 20
parent reply Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 20:09:58 UTC, aberba wrote:
 Supposing I'm new to D, I have previous experience with 
 LLVM-based compilers so I prefer to use LDC. How am I supposed 
 to know what to do? Where is the information on how to get it 
 on my system through visualD installer?

 The LDC experience needs some improvement here.
Supposedly they will want an IDE with everything included in one installer, like Visual Studio, and that's what VisualD installer apparently does.
Oct 23
next sibling parent reply aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 18:01:19 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 20:09:58 UTC, aberba wrote:
 Supposing I'm new to D, I have previous experience with 
 LLVM-based compilers so I prefer to use LDC. How am I supposed 
 to know what to do? Where is the information on how to get it 
 on my system through visualD installer?

 The LDC experience needs some improvement here.
Supposedly they will want an IDE with everything included in one installer, like Visual Studio, and that's what VisualD installer apparently does.
Not saying Kinke SHOULD do it. Was rather disagreeing with the idea that "developers" don't use installers. And that's a shortcoming with the LDC project...no straightforward way to set it up on Windows using an installer. If visuald supports LDC, why not point people to it. LDC at its current state is a small fraction of DMD, why? Convenience. That's the core difference. And convenience sells. And this is only a Windows problem ( started using Windows few weeks ago and now seeing devs don't provide an installer). Now someone is going to tell me as always (I think its already said) to go do it myself. I don't really see it as a priority for me ATM as I know how to do without an installer. But just know that all successful languages have Windows installers I've found the need to use or try. Those that don't are niche and not ready for mass adoption simple because it easier to use something else that hacking your way out of a first impression. Of course we have DMD. Beginners, if you want an LDC installer then "Go do it yourself". I wouldn't consider that a good message.
Oct 23
next sibling parent bachmeier <no spam.net> writes:
On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 20:21:39 UTC, aberba wrote:

 Beginners, if you want an LDC installer then "Go do it 
 yourself". I wouldn't consider that a good message.
Out of curiosity, what is the alternative message? Someone has to do it. This is a volunteer project, not a business, so there's not a manager that can put a couple guys on it.
Oct 23
prev sibling parent reply Imperatorn <johan_forsberg_86 hotmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 20:21:39 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 18:01:19 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 [...]
Not saying Kinke SHOULD do it. Was rather disagreeing with the idea that "developers" don't use installers. And that's a shortcoming with the LDC project...no straightforward way to set it up on Windows using an installer. If visuald supports LDC, why not point people to it. [...]
I agree with this. Not providing an installer gives the message that you're not that interested in people using it. If I have the time later I can try to fix an installer.
Oct 23
parent reply starcanopy <starcanopy protonmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 22:48:33 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 20:21:39 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 18:01:19 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 [...]
Not saying Kinke SHOULD do it. Was rather disagreeing with the idea that "developers" don't use installers. And that's a shortcoming with the LDC project...no straightforward way to set it up on Windows using an installer. If visuald supports LDC, why not point people to it. [...]
I agree with this. Not providing an installer gives the message that you're not that interested in people using it.
That's an exaggeration. Every release is accompanied by binaries that one may easily retrieve. Setting up the dependencies is only done once, and if you're a Windows developer, such an environment most likely exists, and you'll likely only have to add the bin to your path. It's my understanding that there are few people regularly working on LDC; allocating (voluntary!) manpower to a nice but non-essential component doesn't seem wise.
Oct 23
next sibling parent Imperatorn <johan_forsberg_86 hotmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 24 October 2020 at 00:00:02 UTC, starcanopy wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 22:48:33 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 20:21:39 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 18:01:19 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 [...]
Not saying Kinke SHOULD do it. Was rather disagreeing with the idea that "developers" don't use installers. And that's a shortcoming with the LDC project...no straightforward way to set it up on Windows using an installer. If visuald supports LDC, why not point people to it. [...]
I agree with this. Not providing an installer gives the message that you're not that interested in people using it.
That's an exaggeration. Every release is accompanied by binaries that one may easily retrieve. Setting up the dependencies is only done once, and if you're a Windows developer, such an environment most likely exists, and you'll likely only have to add the bin to your path. It's my understanding that there are few people regularly working on LDC; allocating (voluntary!) manpower to a nice but non-essential component doesn't seem wise.
Yes, but if you want to spread D to the world, you might have to lower the effort in using it as much as possible. Ok, I'm comparing to the experience of like top 20 languages, sure. But why not dream big ey? 🚀
Oct 24
prev sibling parent reply Patrick Schluter <Patrick.Schluter bbox.fr> writes:
On Saturday, 24 October 2020 at 00:00:02 UTC, starcanopy wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 22:48:33 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 20:21:39 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 18:01:19 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 [...]
Not saying Kinke SHOULD do it. Was rather disagreeing with the idea that "developers" don't use installers. And that's a shortcoming with the LDC project...no straightforward way to set it up on Windows using an installer. If visuald supports LDC, why not point people to it. [...]
I agree with this. Not providing an installer gives the message that you're not that interested in people using it.
That's an exaggeration. Every release is accompanied by binaries that one may easily retrieve. Setting up the dependencies is only done once, and if you're a Windows developer, such an environment most likely exists, and you'll likely only have to add the bin to your path. It's my understanding that there are few people regularly working on LDC; allocating (voluntary!) manpower to a nice but non-essential component doesn't seem wise.
You underestimate how spoiled windows developer are. Even these simple step are completely out of character for most software on the platform. 20 years ago it wasn't a problem, now on Windows 10 it's a whole other story. How many clicks to get the dialog to set PATH? On NT4 it was 2 clicks, now on Windows 10 I still haven't figured out how to do it without searching like a madman. To make it short. The Windows platform is getting more and more hostile to manual tuning.
Oct 26
next sibling parent rikki cattermole <rikki cattermole.co.nz> writes:
On 26/10/2020 8:14 PM, Patrick Schluter wrote:
 You underestimate how spoiled windows developer are. Even these simple 
 step are completely out of character for most software on the platform. 
 20 years ago it wasn't a problem, now on Windows 10 it's a whole other 
 story. How many clicks to get the dialog to set PATH? On NT4 it was 2 
 clicks, now on Windows 10 I still haven't figured out how to do it 
 without searching like a madman.
 
 To make it short. The Windows platform is getting more and more hostile 
 to manual tuning.
Right click start menu, System -> System Info -> Advanced system settings -> Environment variables Or: Open start menu: type "environment", select "Edit environment variables for your account" Windows is hiding stuff that the majority of users should not need to know about. But everything is easily accessible if you know what you want to do (well everything except changing updates).
Oct 26
prev sibling parent Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Monday, 26 October 2020 at 07:14:55 UTC, Patrick Schluter 
wrote:
 You underestimate how spoiled windows developer are. Even these 
 simple step are completely out of character for most software 
 on the platform. 20 years ago it wasn't a problem, now on 
 Windows 10 it's a whole other story. How many clicks to get the 
 dialog to set PATH? On NT4 it was 2 clicks, now on Windows 10 I 
 still haven't figured out how to do it without searching like a 
 madman.

 To make it short. The Windows platform is getting more and more 
 hostile to manual tuning.
I use set PATH=%SystemRoot%\system32;%SystemRoot%
Oct 26
prev sibling parent reply Guillaume Piolat <first.name guess.com> writes:
On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 18:01:19 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 20:09:58 UTC, aberba wrote:
 Supposing I'm new to D, I have previous experience with 
 LLVM-based compilers so I prefer to use LDC. How am I supposed 
 to know what to do? Where is the information on how to get it 
 on my system through visualD installer?

 The LDC experience needs some improvement here.
Supposedly they will want an IDE with everything included in one installer, like Visual Studio, and that's what VisualD installer apparently does.
How about this then? https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/pull/3598
Oct 25
parent Imperatorn <johan_forsberg_86 hotmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 25 October 2020 at 13:59:44 UTC, Guillaume Piolat 
wrote:
 On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 18:01:19 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 20:09:58 UTC, aberba wrote:
 Supposing I'm new to D, I have previous experience with 
 LLVM-based compilers so I prefer to use LDC. How am I 
 supposed to know what to do? Where is the information on how 
 to get it on my system through visualD installer?

 The LDC experience needs some improvement here.
Supposedly they will want an IDE with everything included in one installer, like Visual Studio, and that's what VisualD installer apparently does.
How about this then? https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/pull/3598
👍
Oct 25
prev sibling parent reply aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 17:36:11 UTC, kinke wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 16:08:47 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It's an option but doesn't fill the need for an installer. Not 
 sure why its hasn't been done.
See https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/1754.
From the discussions, it seems you still don't see the value of an installer...backing it with the idea that LDC is for "developers". I'm a developer myself and I use installers all the time when on Windows...there are very few people I personally know who would go for an archive file to set it up themselves. So not everyone is like you. The reason why I personally go for DMD over LDC is convenience (especially when introducing D to newbies)...even though LDC is more optimized for performance. Unless what you guys are doing is an artificial barrier to get others to not use it.
Oct 20
parent reply Johan Engelen <j j.nl> writes:
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 20:21:56 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 17:36:11 UTC, kinke wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 16:08:47 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It's an option but doesn't fill the need for an installer. 
 Not sure why its hasn't been done.
See https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/1754.
From the discussions, it seems you still don't see the value of an installer...backing it with the idea that LDC is for "developers". I'm a developer myself and I use installers all the time when on Windows...there are very few people I personally know who would go for an archive file to set it up themselves. So not everyone is like you. The reason why I personally go for DMD over LDC is convenience (especially when introducing D to newbies)...even though LDC is more optimized for performance. Unless what you guys are doing is an artificial barrier to get others to not use it.
Guys, all points have been made, there is no wrong and right here, let's stop arguing over this. What is needed is someone who thinks it is useful to have an exe installer and wants to do the work. It cannot be done by someone who thinks it is not useful, because there are decisions to be made (like which folder to install it in, whether to overwrite old or not), that can only be made by someone who actually cares about it. There is no point in trying to convince kinke or me. I'm sure noone will be against uploading the installer exe onto github release page once it's been made and checked. -Johan
Oct 20
next sibling parent jmh530 <john.michael.hall gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 21:58:16 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 20:21:56 UTC, aberba wrote:
 [...]
Guys, all points have been made, there is no wrong and right here, let's stop arguing over this. What is needed is someone who thinks it is useful to have an exe installer and wants to do the work. It cannot be done by someone who thinks it is not useful, because there are decisions to be made (like which folder to install it in, whether to overwrite old or not), that can only be made by someone who actually cares about it. There is no point in trying to convince kinke or me. I'm sure noone will be against uploading the installer exe onto github release page once it's been made and checked. -Johan
Someone who wants to take it on could modify the DMD one https://github.com/dlang/installer/blob/master/windows/ It looks like it uses NSIS.
Oct 20
prev sibling parent John Colvin <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 21:58:16 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 20:21:56 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 17:36:11 UTC, kinke wrote:
 On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 16:08:47 UTC, aberba wrote:
 It's an option but doesn't fill the need for an installer. 
 Not sure why its hasn't been done.
See https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/1754.
From the discussions, it seems you still don't see the value of an installer...backing it with the idea that LDC is for "developers". I'm a developer myself and I use installers all the time when on Windows...there are very few people I personally know who would go for an archive file to set it up themselves. So not everyone is like you. The reason why I personally go for DMD over LDC is convenience (especially when introducing D to newbies)...even though LDC is more optimized for performance. Unless what you guys are doing is an artificial barrier to get others to not use it.
Guys, all points have been made, there is no wrong and right here, let's stop arguing over this. What is needed is someone who thinks it is useful to have an exe installer and wants to do the work. It cannot be done by someone who thinks it is not useful, because there are decisions to be made (like which folder to install it in, whether to overwrite old or not), that can only be made by someone who actually cares about it. There is no point in trying to convince kinke or me. I'm sure noone will be against uploading the installer exe onto github release page once it's been made and checked. -Johan
Johan hits an important nail right on the head here. While it is possible to design for others who are unlike you, it's much harder than designing for yourself or those who have similar values and priorities w.r.t. the thing in question. A lot of talk about "we (and by we I mean you) should do this thing I think is important" isn't pushing in the most productive direction, because _*_*_{ even if one becomes convinced that there is value in something, that does not mean one has the relevant understanding necessary for good design of that thing }_*_*_ Either the person with the problem works on understanding the tools to fix the problem, or the person with the tools works on understanding the problem. When values and "user experience" and "ease of use" are in play, I think the latter usually gets harder than normal, because understanding what will be easy or pleasing for others who are unlike us is not something everyone is good at.* This shifts the balance towards preferring the former approach where the person with the problem works towards doing at least a significant part of the design.** There will always be other considerations of course, this is just one force out of many. This is not to say that developers shouldn't be thoughtful about their users - they definitely should be - but that doing a good job of that when the users are unlike the developer is _hard_. * Perhaps in practice that ability is negatively associated with a strong sense of personal taste, e.g. great musicians writing the music _they_ want, not trying to specifically please people; the magic isn't that they understand other people, it's that their particular tastes resonate with others strongly. Maybe truly great mass-market businesses come from people who both have that magic _and_ a strong ability to experience their work from other's perspectives, the combination being rare and the ability to integrate the two effectively being even rarer (Steve Jobs comes to mind). ** Design and implementation often don't separate very cleanly in practice, so this probably means implementing it too, at least to proof-of-concept quality.
Oct 22