On Saturday, 25 August 2018 at 22:55:05 UTC, RhyS wrote:
Be honest, how many people will use BetterC in production!
Much, MUCH more likely than that I would ever use full D with GC
in production.
Really, if I want a language with a GC, D is not that good. Why
wouldn't I use a JVM language (
On Monday, 13 August 2018 at 01:49:35 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
On Sunday, 12 August 2018 at 06:35:17 UTC, Eugene Wissner wrote:
P.S. In the last weeks I had thoughts to split low-level stuff
from tanya and put it into a separate library, kind of native,
gc-free x86-64 (and maybe aarch64) Linu
On Saturday, 28 July 2018 at 21:44:10 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
On Saturday, 28 July 2018 at 21:27:12 UTC, bpr wrote:
I hear you. You're looking (roughly) for a better
Java/Go/Scala, and I'm looking for a better C/C++/Rust, at
least for what I work on now. I don't think D can be both
right now, a
On Saturday, 28 July 2018 at 20:34:37 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
On Saturday, 28 July 2018 at 19:55:56 UTC, bpr wrote:
On Saturday, 28 July 2018 at 15:36:43 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
I think that I no longer fall into the category of developer
that D is after. D is targeting pedal-to-the-metal
requiremen
On Saturday, 28 July 2018 at 15:36:43 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
I think that I no longer fall into the category of developer
that D is after. D is targeting pedal-to-the-metal
requirements, and I don't need that. TBH I think 99% of
developers don't need it.
I'm 99% sure you just made that number u
On Wednesday, 25 July 2018 at 17:23:40 UTC, Ecstatic Coder wrote:
But don't be too optimistic about BetterC...
I'm too old to get optimistic about these things. In the very
best case, D has quite an uphill battle for market share. Any non
mainstream language does. If I were a betting man, I'd
On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 17:24:41 UTC, Seb wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 17:14:53 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 16:15:52 UTC, bpr wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 14:07:43 UTC, Ecstatic Coder
wrote:
[...]
No. For many C++ users, tracing GC is absolutely not an
o
On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 14:07:43 UTC, Ecstatic Coder wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 13:23:32 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 09:54:37 UTC, Ecstatic Coder wrote:
So, at the moment, I don't see how you can EASILY convince
people to use BetterC for C/C++ use cases, like
On Monday, 2 July 2018 at 10:25:07 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
Small update. With the help of evilrat I was able to translate
the C headers to D.
https://github.com/andre2007/grpc/tree/feature/d/src/d/source/grpc/c
While the source code compiles without errors, everything is
completely untested.
A
On Tuesday, 29 May 2018 at 11:31:53 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 May 2018 at 05:11:27 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
D is probably at the edge of what I can tollerate
complexity-wise. And we’ll get to simplify a few things soon I
believe.
What are the things that you think will b
On Monday, 5 February 2018 at 01:38:13 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
On Sunday, 4 February 2018 at 20:15:47 UTC, bpr wrote:
Which benefits of C are lost?
The ability to program on 16-bit platforms (yeah.. they still
exist ;-)
Thanks, that's a good answer!
I did put a bit of effort in tryin
On Sunday, 4 February 2018 at 11:14:43 UTC, JN wrote:
On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 15:06:35 UTC, Benny wrote:
You want to produce PDFs? fpdf 2015-Apr-06, a very limited PDF
generation tool last updated 3 years go.
While not as trivial as just using a dub package, D easy
interop with C mean
On Sunday, 24 December 2017 at 10:57:28 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
The motivation behind the -betterC flag is *not* to write new
programs in the general case.
Whether you agree or not, that is *exactly* how some programmers
would like to use it. I think that's a good thing, and I hope
lots of ot
On Saturday, 23 December 2017 at 09:10:25 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 12/22/2017 7:23 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
I think we are now in a world where Rust is the zero cost
abstraction
language to replace C and C++, except for those who are
determined to
stay with C++ and evolve it.
Maybe it is
On Friday, 22 December 2017 at 13:38:25 UTC, Dan Partelly wrote:
It works as a "betterC" it seems, but you loose a lot of
functionality which should be in a "better C" and again, a lot
from the standard libraries is lost. Template C++ 2017 works
well for a better C as well, and I retain 0 cost
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 16:57:36 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 06:18:20PM -0800, Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d wrote: [...]
BetterC is a door-opener for an awful lot of areas D has been
excluded from, and requiring druntime is a barrier for that.
Doesn't this mean
On Monday, 23 October 2017 at 11:21:13 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Saturday, 21 October 2017 at 18:52:15 UTC, bitwise wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 October 2017 at 08:56:21 UTC, Satoshi wrote:
async/await (vibe.d is nice but useless in comparison to C#
or js async/await idiom)
Reference counting
On Friday, 14 July 2017 at 09:02:58 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
The beauty of D lies in it's holistic approach.
The one unique feature to point out would be CTFE which is not
to be found in other compiled langauges.
CTFE is found in Nim, as well as inline assembler. Relatively
easy to use AST ma
On Monday, 10 July 2017 at 16:16:40 UTC, bpr wrote:
On Monday, 10 July 2017 at 01:21:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Ah, I guess it is very similar after all, except it'd be based
on top of and coexist with all of D's design by introspection
stuff (rather than exist without it as with C++), thus
On Monday, 10 July 2017 at 01:21:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Ah, I guess it is very similar after all, except it'd be based
on top of and coexist with all of D's design by introspection
stuff (rather than exist without it as with C++), thus avoiding
a lot of the downsides and getting best of
On Monday, 10 July 2017 at 01:21:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Ah, I guess it is very similar after all, except it'd be based
on top of and coexist with all of D's design by introspection
stuff (rather than exist without it as with C++), thus avoiding
a lot of the downsides and getting best of
On Monday, 10 July 2017 at 01:21:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Ah, I guess it is very similar after all, except it'd be based
on top of and coexist with all of D's design by introspection
stuff (rather than exist without it as with C++), thus avoiding
a lot of the downsides and getting best of
On Sunday, 9 July 2017 at 20:22:16 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
Obviously this is all very incomplete, but it's an idea I think
is rather interesting.
You've seen this, right?
https://wiki.dlang.org/User:9rnsr/DIP:_Template_Parameter_Constraint
A small step in one such direction, in
On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:24:00 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
Go gets parallel compilation, at last, and better garbage
collection. The former is not a problem for D, but the latter…
It should also be noted that, even though it's still a research
project, Scala native just recently upgraded
On Saturday, 10 June 2017 at 23:30:18 UTC, Liam McGillivray wrote:
I'd be fascinated by a revised D like language, say D3 or
whatever.
Here are some ways that D3 can be an improvement of D2:
-Final by default
Wow, after all that, this is it? I think final by default would
be an improvement
On Wednesday, 19 April 2017 at 00:30:31 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I'm not saying you cannot do cool and useful things with AST
macros. My position is it encourages absolutely awful code as
(usually inexperienced) programmers compete to show how clever
their macros are.
I'd think that that's a
On Tuesday, 18 April 2017 at 08:01:14 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2017-04-18 08:59, Stefan Koch wrote:
The corresponding ast-macros would be extremely complex
No, it's not that complex.
Here's how it's done in Nim, a statically typed language similar
to D, but with Python syntax, and mac
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:58:09 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote:
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 20:54:23 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
Wishlist for D3: Some brilliant form of sugar for declaring a
function that takes a range.
auto parseFile()(auto input if isRandomAccessRangeOf!ubyte &&
hasSlicing) {
M
On Monday, 6 March 2017 at 21:22:46 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 06.03.2017 21:49, Enamex wrote:
On Monday, 6 March 2017 at 01:37:18 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 3/4/17 10:36 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5de7/591a853ec947f8de7dc70df0b2ecc38b8774.pdf
I have
On Monday, 6 March 2017 at 16:42:50 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
Writing up a detailed example with code showing how to avoid
the GC in the most common situations, posting it on Reddit, and
then making it easy to find on dlang.org would be a good start.
Given the importance of these issues, it should
On Wednesday, 15 February 2017 at 17:53:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
Typo: I mean't that one cannot assume that Apple hardware has
more than 2 cores (so one has to write applications that
perform well with only 2 cores).
You're missing what I consider to be 'the Big Picture', namely
tha
On Wednesday, 15 February 2017 at 14:44:55 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
Another example is Swift. Swift managed to take over
Objective-C rather quickly IMO, but Swift has also absorbed the
non-C semantics of Objective-C, thus it did not require
changing existing practice significantly.
Swi
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 16:43:13 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
If semicolons are such a terrible drain, there's always JS and
Python.
For someone who likes D, Nim (http://www.nim-lang.org) would be
better a choice for a language at the same level with Python like
syntax. Changing D su
On Thursday, 26 May 2016 at 18:53:35 UTC, Iakh wrote:
Functions with lambdas cannot be @nogc as far as they allocates
closures.
Counterexample:
// Note that this is NOT a good way to do numerical quadrature!
double integrate(scope double delegate(double x) @nogc f,
double lo
34 matches
Mail list logo
