On 09/05/2014 15:34, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 9 May 2014 12:20, Bruno Medeiros via Digitalmars-d-announce > <digita lmars-d- announce@ puremagic.com> wrote: >> On 07/05/2014 17:42, Johannes Pfau wrote: >>> >>> Am Wed, 07 May 2014 14:38:32 +0100 >>> schrieb Bruno Medeiros <bruno.do. medeiros+ dng@gmail. com>: >>> >>>> On 04/05/2014 10:38, Johannes Pfau wrote: >>>>> >>>>> We've just uploaded new binary releases to >>>>> http:// gdcproj ect.org/ downloads/ >>>>> >>>>> ## GDC changes ## >>>>> >>>>> As we merged the first parts of Daniel Greens MinGW changes >>>>> back into GDC we now also provide initial (automated) MinGW builds. >>>>> These builds are mostly unsupported and will likely have many more >>>>> bugs than the older releases posted by Daniel so don't expect too >>>>> much. >>>>> We've just uploaded new binary releases to## GDC changes ##As we merged the first parts of Daniel Greens MinGW changesback into GDC we now also provide initial (automated) MinGW builds.These builds are mostly unsupported and will likely have many morebugs than the older releases posted by Daniel so don't expect toomuch. >>>> >>>> Glad to hear there is some progress here, but are there plans to make >>>> this supported in the future? >>>> >>>> Also, what is the difference between Daniel Green's build, and the >>>> native Standard Builds? >>>> >>>> On 04/05/2014 10:38, Johannes Pfau wrote:Glad to hear there is some progress here, but are there plans to makethis supported in the future?Also, what is the difference between Daniel Green's build, and thenative Standard Builds? >>> >>> Daniels builds apply some more patches, see >>> for details. >>> The builds on gdcproject.org use the standard git sources of gdc which >>> only include the subset of these patches that's necessary to compile & >>> run a hello world program. >>> Am Wed, 07 May 2014 14:38:32 +0100schrieb Bruno MedeirosDaniels builds apply some more patches, see https:// github.com/ venix1/ MinGW-GDC for details.The builds on gdcproject.org use the standard git sources of gdc whichonly include the subset of these patches that's necessary to compile &run a hello world program. >> >> I'm not familiar with the internals of compiler and runtime architecture, >> but I'm curious, why is is that so many complicated patches are necessary? >> I understand the D runtime has to access Windows API, correct? But that >> should all be available in the MinGW target as well, no? Otherwise, what is >> the difference here when DMD for Windows is compiled, vs when GDC is >> compiled? >> On 07/05/2014 17:42, Johannes Pfau wrote:I'm not familiar with the internals of compiler and runtime architecture,but I'm curious, why is is that so many complicated patches are necessary?I understand the D runtime has to access Windows API, correct? But thatshould all be available in the MinGW target as well, no? Otherwise, what isthe difference here when DMD for Windows is compiled, vs when GDC iscompiled? > > DMD x86 on Windows uses the Digital Mars toolchain for linking, etc. > DMD x86_64 on Windows uses the MSVC toolchain for linking, etc. > GDC on Windows uses the GNU toolchain for linking, etc. > On 9 May 2014 12:20, Bruno Medeiros via Digitalmars-d-announcewrote:DMD x86 on Windows uses the Digital Mars toolchain for linking, etc.DMD x86_64 on Windows uses the MSVC toolchain for linking, etc.GDC on Windows uses the GNU toolchain for linking, etc. > Another potentially crucial difference is that DMD compiles directly > to object file. GCC requires an assembler installed. This probably > does make it easier for DMD to invented custom sections for its own > abuse. > So it's not so much the D runtime (the 'core', 'rt', 'gc', etc, modules of the D standard library) that is lacking and in need of patches/changes, but rather the DMD frontend and code generator, right? If so, I think I understand. -- Bruno Medeiros https:// twitter.com/ brunodo medeiros