Re: Preparing for the New DIP Process
On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 22:31:59 UTC, FairEnough wrote: No more comments about this in this thread. I promise. Thank you. For those who don't consider it 'a pile of mush', here is where it 'can' be discussed (freely I hope): It can be freely discussed here, too. Just please stop hijacking threads to do it. As for "pile of mush", it's what the dead horse has been beaten into at this point.
Re: Preparing for the New DIP Process
On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 15:31:24 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 04:47:30 UTC, FairEnough wrote: So 60 some odd posts later... If you want to beat this pile of mush further, please do it in a new thread. Going forward, any posts I see about private-to-the-module which are off topic in any given thread will be happily deleted. You've hijacked enough of them. Thanks! No more comments about this in this thread. I promise. For those who don't consider it 'a pile of mush', here is where it 'can' be discussed (freely I hope): https://github.com/orgs/opendlang/discussions/11
Re: Preparing for the New DIP Process
On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 15:31:24 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 04:47:30 UTC, FairEnough wrote: So 60 some odd posts later... If you want to beat this pile of mush further, please do it in a new thread. Going forward, any posts I see about private-to-the-module which are off topic in any given thread will be happily deleted. You've hijacked enough of them. Thanks! Off topic certainly, but a 'pile of mush'?
Re: Preparing for the New DIP Process
On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 15:31:24 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 04:47:30 UTC, FairEnough wrote: So 60 some odd posts later... If you want to beat this pile of mush further, please do it in a new thread. Going forward, any posts I see about private-to-the-module which are off topic in any given thread will be happily deleted. You've hijacked enough of them. Thanks! Well I did specifcally say 55+ posts ago that this topic really should be discussed elsewhere. But people continued to discuss it anyway - but only my responses raised your annoyance? Do you mean you would actually allow a thread to discuss this topic, if that were the topic of that thread? Such threads always get hijacked by irritant people completely opposed to this idea, and you end up killing those threads too.
Re: A Conversation with Martin Kinkelin on LDC
On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 18:11:24 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Some of you may recall the two conversations I had with Walter a while back, part of what I called the 'D Community Conversations' series. I've long planned to get that going as a regular, monthly thing. Finally, the time has come. I want to thank Martin Kinkelin for agreeing to sit down with me to chat about his road to programming and to the D language, how he ended up as the lead maintainer of LDC, and some of the details about the role. Hey Mike and Martin, It's very nice that you took the time to have this conversation and record it! Great to be able to put a face to an internet name, and hear a little about someones back story :) I'm happy you touched on Martin's CI work besides his programming contributions, because CI/packaging is probably not something many people think about when you say "compiler development". The (continued) work on CI and automatic release packaging by Martin has been enormous. It has taken a huge amount of time and effort - and I'm sure a lot of frustration went along with it - but the end result really is stellar. As Martin mentions, it works for forks as well, great stuff. cheers, Johan
A Conversation with Martin Kinkelin on LDC
Some of you may recall the two conversations I had with Walter a while back, part of what I called the 'D Community Conversations' series. I've long planned to get that going as a regular, monthly thing. Finally, the time has come. I want to thank Martin Kinkelin for agreeing to sit down with me to chat about his road to programming and to the D language, how he ended up as the lead maintainer of LDC, and some of the details about the role. I very much enjoyed our conversation. I hope you do, too. You can find it here: https://youtu.be/XpPV5OBJEvg The full playlist is here: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIldXzSkPUXXEL-2gfragUgNC2P2Yw6au=jih87SW_4A7jwRt5 Look for the next episode on the last weekend in February.
Re: Preparing for the New DIP Process
On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 04:47:30 UTC, FairEnough wrote: So 60 some odd posts later... If you want to beat this pile of mush further, please do it in a new thread. Going forward, any posts I see about private-to-the-module which are off topic in any given thread will be happily deleted. You've hijacked enough of them. Thanks!
Re: Preparing for the New DIP Process
On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 04:47:30 UTC, FairEnough wrote:
module test;
@safe:
import std;
class C
{
private(this) int x; // intent: other code in this
module cannnot mutate this.
private(this) int y; // intent: other code in this
module cannnot mutate this.
invariant () { assert (x == y); }
void modifyX() {...}
void modifyY() {...}
}
void foo(C c)
{
c.x = 10; // compiler will not compile this code.
c.modifyX();
}
Thank you for posting a very informative example, i think not
just myself but everyone else on this forum had completely forgot
how class private is supposed to work. In spite of the 1000 or so
posts you've made about it.
Keep up the good work!
