Re: GSOC 2015 - GNU dmd
On Wednesday, 4 March 2015 at 22:08:44 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 3/3/2015 1:15 PM, notna wrote: not sure if someone should inform them about the DMD name clash... or just enjoy the popularity ;) http://www.gnu.org/software/dmd I sent them a note. I'd suggest Daemon Hurder or dhurd.
Re: Endovena: a dependency injection framework.
On Friday, 17 October 2014 at 22:55:24 UTC, Orfeo wrote: * [endovena] https://github.com/o3o/endovena Boost License 1.0 I would suggest naming the class something other than Container. Injector or Factory or something. Container gets confusing with std.container.
Re: 1st draft of complete class-based std.random successor
On Thursday, 20 March 2014 at 08:22:37 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote: The issue isn't class vs struct, but rather value semantic vs reference semantic (classes are always ref, but structs can be either). That's only completely true if structs are referred to by pointer. ref parameters/returns aren't quite sufficient to keep a struct acting as a reference for all purposes. But good example. I'll have to consider that when I port the cryptographic prngs.
Re: 1st draft of complete class-based std.random successor
On Thursday, 20 March 2014 at 21:16:27 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: I think there's a good case for a std.random2.crypto module that contains RNGs that are specifically suitable for cryptography. That said I think the bar here has to be set VERY high, which is why I didn't even begin working on it yet. It has been argued by some that where crypto in Phobos is concerned, we shouldn't take community contributions but we should hire security experts to write the functionality for us. To be certain that the implementation doesn't have any security holes?
Re: 1st draft of complete class-based std.random successor
On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 23:49:41 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: Hello all, As some of you may already know, monarch_dodra and I have spent quite a lot of time over the last year discussing the state of std.random. To cut a long story short, there are significant problems that arise because the current RNGs are value types rather than reference types. Any chance that you could describe them? I was about to resume porting the dcrypt library into Phobos, and had intended to flip the classes into structs, to match what the rest of the library was doing.
