www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 3362] New: crippling lack of 64-bit support

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3362

           Summary: crippling lack of 64-bit support
           Product: D
           Version: 2.032
          Platform: x86_64
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: critical
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
        ReportedBy: vminch gmail.com



D is an incredibly alluring language, but it's become impossible to use in many
types of projects where interoperability with C codebases is necessary. DMD
doesn't support linking with 64-bit shared objects, and doesn't support 64-bit
binaries. This means that any C libraries we need to use must be compiled as
32bit objects and must be shipped with our software. It's become simpler just
to use g++ now..

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Oct 04 2009
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3362


Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |clugdbug yahoo.com.au
         Resolution|                            |INVALID



Although this is one of the crucial issues facing D, it's not a bug, and
doesn't belong in Bugzilla.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 18 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3362


Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
                 CC|                            |braddr puremagic.com
            Version|2.032                       |unspecified
         Resolution|INVALID                     |
           Severity|critical                    |enhancement



---
We do use bugzilla to track enhancement requests though, so re-opening.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 18 2010
prev sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3362


Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID





 We do use bugzilla to track enhancement requests though, so re-opening.


Come on, it's NOT an enhancement request. That's a request for a complete new
backend! There are two possible responses: INVALID, or WONTFIX. I think it's
invalid, because of the availability of LDC. Seriously, it's a bugzilla report
of no value, and including these kind of things reduces the value of bugzilla.

BTW, while you're here, we need to change the 'version' specifiers. There
should be D1 only, D2 only, and both. The current list of 100 different
versions causes lots of problems, and adds _no_ value. None. More importantly
it gives no way of specifying D1-only bugs.
Could you add: D1, D2, D1-only, to the existing list, so we can migrate them
across?

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 18 2010