On 11/28/2014 10:26 PM, Sly wrote:
I still don't understand how to
read this signature:
Point!T getResponse(T: Point!T)(string question)
The following is what makes sense to me.
Sorry for going step by step but I think it helped me understand your
question. (See item 3 below.)
1) Point!T
On Saturday, November 29, 2014 07:24:55 Freddy via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
import std.stdio;
@safe:
void main()
{
writeln(Edit source/app.d to start your project.);
}
source/app.d(5): Error: safe function 'D main' cannot call system
function
Ah, now I see. In C++ we would also need to supply template
parameters, but we'd put them before return type
(templatetypename T getResponsePointT); in D we put them
before the colon.
Now I'm trying to write a specialization for Pair. It seems that
this is the way to do it:
Pair!(A, B)
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 02:43:14 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Saturday, November 29, 2014 01:30:55 Ledd via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Friday, 28 November 2014 at 12:35:28 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
What is missing?
an ISO standard ?
Someday, maybe, but most
On 11/29/2014 12:41 AM, Sly wrote:
Ah, now I see. In C++ we would also need to supply template
parameters, but we'd put them before return type
(templatetypename T getResponsePointT); in D we put them
before the colon.
Now I'm trying to write a specialization for Pair. It seems that
this is the
I can't find a way to use a pure constructor to create both
mutable and immutable instances of the same class, when one of
the fields I assign is a string.
This works fine:
class A
{
int value;
this(int value_) pure
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:03:13 UTC, Ledd wrote:
Do you really think that a system language, or just a
language that aims to be popular, can possibly discard the idea
of getting into an international standard ?
I still can't recall any major language that doesn't have a
standard,
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:11:51 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Point!T getResponse(P : Point!T, T)(string question)
{
// ...
}
This doesn't work because now this definition has 2 parameters P
and T. I have to specify both like this: auto pt =
getResponse!(Point!int, int)(point);
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:41:00 UTC, jostly wrote:
I can't find a way to use a pure constructor to create both
mutable and immutable instances of the same class, when one of
the fields I assign is a string.
After poking around a bit, I believe it is caused by issue #10012
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:41:00 UTC, jostly wrote:
I can't find a way to use a pure constructor to create both
mutable and immutable instances of the same class, when one of
the fields I assign is a string.
[...]
The question is: am I missing something that would make it
possible to
On Friday, 28 November 2014 at 22:54:42 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 16:27:53 David Held via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On 11/23/2014 3:12 PM, anonymous wrote:
[...]
And even pointer dereferencing is @safe. Invalid ones will
fail
On Friday, 28 November 2014 at 19:59:40 UTC, Xinok wrote:
Given that we have GDC with the GCC backend and LDC with the
LLVM backend, what are the benefits of keeping the DMD compiler
backend? It seems to me that GCC and LLVM are far more
developed and better supported by their respective
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 11:07:34 UTC, Sly wrote:
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:11:51 UTC, Ali Çehreli
wrote:
Point!T getResponse(P : Point!T, T)(string question)
{
// ...
}
This doesn't work because now this definition has 2 parameters P
and T. I have to specify both like
On Saturday, November 29, 2014 10:35:32 bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:03:13 UTC, Ledd wrote:
Do you really think that a system language, or just a
language that aims to be popular, can possibly discard the idea
of getting into an international
You miss another definition which introduces a conflict:
T getResponse(T)(string question)
{...}
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 17:20:42 UTC, Meta wrote:
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 11:07:34 UTC, Sly wrote:
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:11:51 UTC, Ali Çehreli
wrote:
Point!T
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 17:48:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Saturday, November 29, 2014 10:35:32 bachmeier via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
C was standardized in 1989. C++ was standardized in 1998. I'm
unaware of ISO (or any other) standardization for Go,
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 10:35:32 +
bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-learn digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com
wrote:
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:03:13 UTC, Ledd wrote:
Do you really think that a system language, or just a
language that aims to be popular, can possibly discard the idea
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 15:37:32 +
Joakim via Digitalmars-d-learn digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com
wrote:
build time for the whole DMD compiler with standard library,
using
G++: 100 seconds. yea, no kidding.
gdc: i don't even want to think about that, way t long.
ldc: not that
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 18:19:40 UTC, Sly wrote:
You miss another definition which introduces a conflict:
T getResponse(T)(string question)
{...}
In that case, you're better off with a pair of declarations:
struct Point(T)
{
T x;
T y;
}
T getResponse(T)(string
This is clearly an incorrect way because it requires editing the
original definition every time a new class is introduced.
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 19:10:34 UTC, Meta wrote:
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 18:19:40 UTC, Sly wrote:
You miss another definition which introduces a
I'm trying to do this:
ubyte[MAPSIZE][MAPSIZE] map = 1;
but it doesn't work and I can't seem to cast the value to a ubyte
(which looks rather ugly and out of place in D anyway). Is there
a way to do this other than using a couple of loops?
Cheers
Paul
On 11/29/2014 10:19 AM, Sly wrote:
You miss another definition which introduces a conflict:
T getResponse(T)(string question)
{...}
The following works with dmd git head:
import std.stdio;
T getResponse(T)(string question)
{
writef(%s (%s): , question, T.stringof);
T response;
Paul:
I'm trying to do this:
ubyte[MAPSIZE][MAPSIZE] map = 1;
but it doesn't work and I can't seem to cast the value to a
ubyte (which looks rather ugly and out of place in D anyway).
Is there a way to do this other than using a couple of loops?
This works:
enum MAPSIZE = 3;
void main()
Dne Sat, 29 Nov 2014 21:10:41 +0100 Paul via Digitalmars-d-learn
digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com napsal(a):
I'm trying to do this:
ubyte[MAPSIZE][MAPSIZE] map = 1;
but it doesn't work and I can't seem to cast the value to a ubyte (which
looks rather ugly and out of place in D anyway).
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 21:28:36 +0100
Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d-learn
digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com wrote:
Dne Sat, 29 Nov 2014 21:10:41 +0100 Paul via Digitalmars-d-learn
digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com napsal(a):
I'm trying to do this:
ubyte[MAPSIZE][MAPSIZE] map = 1;
Daniel Kozak:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24600796/d-set-default-value-for-a-struct-member-which-is-a-multidimensional-static-arr/24754361#24754361
Do you also know why the simplest syntax doesn't work? Can't it
be implemented and added to the D language?
Bye,
bearophile
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 20:22:40 UTC, bearophile wrote:
This works:
enum MAPSIZE = 3;
void main() {
ubyte[MAPSIZE][MAPSIZE] map2 = 1;
}
This doesn't work:
enum MAPSIZE = 3;
ubyte[MAPSIZE][MAPSIZE] map1 = ubyte(1);
void main() {}
Why isn't this working?
I'm afraid I don't
On 11/26/2014 4:40 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
[...]
override
size_t toHash() @trusted pure const nothrow
{
auto func = assumePure((typeid(importantStuff).getHash));
return func(importantStuff);
}
Very helpful, thanks! Am I right in assuming that there is some
OK. I'm using gdc 4.8.2 and this doesn't compile, so it's
probably an old version. Checked on ideone and it works with
dmd-2.042.
Thanks a lot for your help!
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 20:16:24 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 11/29/2014 10:19 AM, Sly wrote:
You miss another definition which
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 20:45:34 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Daniel Kozak:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24600796/d-set-default-value-for-a-struct-member-which-is-a-multidimensional-static-arr/24754361#24754361
Do you also know why the simplest syntax doesn't work? Can't it
be
I'm assuming the answer is yes.
If so, that implies that I could execute a function pointer that
doesn't point to anything meaningful. Conversely, functionality
could exist that I can't get access to because my function
pointer is unavailable?
If these are dangers, is there a technique or
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 10:59:21PM +, WhatMeWorry via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
I'm assuming the answer is yes.
If so, that implies that I could execute a function pointer that
doesn't point to anything meaningful. Conversely, functionality could
exist that I can't get access to
On 11/29/2014 12:45 PM, David Held wrote:
On 11/26/2014 4:40 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
[...]
override
size_t toHash() @trusted pure const nothrow
{
auto func = assumePure((typeid(importantStuff).getHash));
return func(importantStuff);
}
Am I right in
On 11/29/14, 3:48 PM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 15:37:32 +
Joakim via Digitalmars-d-learn digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com
wrote:
build time for the whole DMD compiler with standard library,
using
G++: 100 seconds. yea, no kidding.
gdc: i don't even want
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 22:57:52 -0300
Ary Borenszweig via Digitalmars-d-learn
digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com wrote:
besides, i don't want to use anything llvm-related.
Why not?
let's say that there is some ideological reasons.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 11/29/2014 3:59 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
[...]
typeid() is a runtime function. I think it will be costly every time
toHash is called. The function pointer can be initialized once.
// I've deduced the type from an error message. ;)
static const ulong delegate(const(void*)) const pure
36 matches
Mail list logo
