Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 07:49:02 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf Thoughts? Sutter gave a longer presentation on his proposal at CppCon, which was posted online late last month and is the

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 07:49:02 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf Thoughts? Won't this abstraction compete directly with concepts (lite) and even with templates? Metaclasses appear to be at

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:54:44 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:36:22 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:32:27 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:27:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:11:11 UTC,

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:36:22 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:32:27 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:27:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:11:11 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:07:51 UTC, Kagamin

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:32:27 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:27:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:11:11 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:07:51 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 18:32:25 UTC,

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:32:27 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:27:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:11:11 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:07:51 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 18:32:25 UTC,

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:27:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:11:11 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:07:51 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 18:32:25 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: "Enable writing compiler-enforced patterns for any

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:11:11 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:07:51 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 18:32:25 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: "Enable writing compiler-enforced patterns for any purpose: coding standards (e.g., many Core Guidelines

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:11:11 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: I know that, what is your point? this: https://forum.dlang.org/post/ikavudrxltlbuceea...@forum.dlang.org

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:07:51 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 18:32:25 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: "Enable writing compiler-enforced patterns for any purpose: coding standards (e.g., many Core Guidelines “enforce” rules) " Yes, it does, right there. Are you reading the

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 12:47:49 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 12:34:21 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: [ ... ] I can understand that you don't want to be trolled. Many other people feel the same way. Therefore I'd ask you to reflect on what it means to be trolling. Why?

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 18:32:25 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: "Enable writing compiler-enforced patterns for any purpose: coding standards (e.g., many Core Guidelines “enforce” rules) " Yes, it does, right there. Are you reading the same paper that I am? It works only on declarations, like

Re: [OT] Generative C++

https://www.xkcd.com/1028/ https://www.xkcd.com/1860/

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 12:34:21 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: [ ... ] I can understand that you don't want to be trolled. Many other people feel the same way. Therefore I'd ask you to reflect on what it means to be trolling.

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 00:49:05 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: This is in reference to your earlier: And I have said "I am not interested in arguing about what I said or I didn't said" which you are literately doing right now. If trying to make yourself feel better by deliberating

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 04.08.2017 01:26, 12345swordy wrote: The C++ @nogc implementation would also not be built-in, and whether or not the memory allocator in question is built-in has no bearing on whether my question was ridiculous or not. (I.e. you are splitting hairs.) I never said anything about a C++

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 23:59:01 UTC, jmh530 wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 22:38:08 UTC, Joakim wrote: 30-page long thread from four years ago, enjoy: :D http://forum.dlang.org/thread/l5otb1$1dhi$1...@digitalmars.com This post from Walter may summarize his feelings:

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 22:38:08 UTC, Joakim wrote: 30-page long thread from four years ago, enjoy: :D http://forum.dlang.org/thread/l5otb1$1dhi$1...@digitalmars.com This post from Walter may summarize his feelings: http://forum.dlang.org/post/l6co6u$vo$1...@digitalmars.com Would it

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 20:56:38 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 22:06, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:45:12 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 21:28, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 20:32,

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 22:17:57 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 22:06:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 7/31/2017 5:41 AM, Joakim wrote: If he's right that C++ use is so balkanized, this will simplify some code but further balkanize the language. That might be worth

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 22:06:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 7/31/2017 5:41 AM, Joakim wrote: If he's right that C++ use is so balkanized, this will simplify some code but further balkanize the language. That might be worth it for them, but rather than simplifying the language, it

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 03.08.2017 22:54, Joakim wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ...No? I was referring to the

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 03.08.2017 22:06, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:45:12 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 21:28, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote: [...] On 02.08.2017 15:50, 12345swordy wrote:

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper. The paper

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:45:12 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 21:28, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote: [...] On 02.08.2017 15:50, 12345swordy wrote: [...] How would you use the proposed

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 03.08.2017 21:28, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ...No? I was referring to

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper. The paper

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote: On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper. The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper. The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D already does what the paper proposes.

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper. The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D already does what the paper proposes.

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 14:08:21 UTC, jmh530 wrote: On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 13:50:49 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does? Alex Like the ability to

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 13:50:49 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does? Alex Like the ability to run dscanner at compile-time?

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 09:50:41 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/2/2017 2:24 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: And there was me being a great fan of AST macros in those languages that have them. There are many who share your views here :-) Well d have a goto statement

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 8/2/2017 2:24 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: And there was me being a great fan of AST macros in those languages that have them. There are many who share your views here :-)

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 15:06 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > I can't say I understand the proposal, but if it is similar to AST macros, > my  > argument against that is well known and similar to yours And there was me being a great fan of AST macros in those languages that

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 22:11:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: It's basically a restricted form of AST-Macros. Not as aweful as it could have been but still quite complex and I have no idea how one would implement that efficiently. They look as efficient as templates. Both duplicate the AST

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 22:11:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 22:06:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 7/31/2017 5:41 AM, Joakim wrote: If he's right that C++ use is so balkanized, this will simplify some code but further balkanize the language. That might be worth

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 22:06:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 7/31/2017 5:41 AM, Joakim wrote: If he's right that C++ use is so balkanized, this will simplify some code but further balkanize the language. That might be worth it for them, but rather than simplifying the language, it

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 7/31/2017 5:41 AM, Joakim wrote: If he's right that C++ use is so balkanized, this will simplify some code but further balkanize the language. That might be worth it for them, but rather than simplifying the language, it makes it more powerful and more complex, heading higher up into the

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Fri, 2017-07-28 at 20:44 +0200, Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 2017-07-28 12:30, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > > This was arguably the most talked about keynote in ACCU history. I had to > > close the questions after 75 minutes, and even then it went on longer. > >

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 07:49:02 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf Thoughts? Thanks for mentioning this: I just watched the video linked from his blog post, but didn't read the paper. It's an

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Saturday, 29 July 2017 at 06:22:46 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: There is no reason you can't reflect on DblRep and generate the bit fields, see Stevens recent talk. https://forum.dlang.org/thread/ojai9r$se7$1...@digitalmars.com That will be cleaner indeed, but DCD will still be unable to

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 19:20:31 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: Reading through the dlang documentation, I can't find a way to enforce a certain code standard using mixins _traits ctfe. Imo it's very beneficial to have coding standards enforce by compile time. Typical way to enforce patterns

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 28 July 2017 at 21:20, 12345swordy via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 18:24:02 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 05:38:10PM +, Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d >> wrote: >>> >>> [...] >> >> >> Not necessarily. Perhaps "IR" is

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 22:12:32 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:41:28 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ... That's not what I consider to be "simple" (Hard to read IMO). struct DblRep { mixin(bitfieldString([ BitFieldDesc(Type.Ulong, "fraction", 23),

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 22:12:32 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:41:28 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ... That's not what I consider to be "simple" (Hard to read IMO). struct DblRep { mixin(bitfieldString([ BitFieldDesc(Type.Ulong, "fraction", 23),

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:41:28 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: ... That's not what I consider to be "simple" (Hard to read IMO). struct DblRep { mixin(bitfieldString([ BitFieldDesc(Type.Ulong, "fraction", 23), BitFieldDesc(Type.Ushort, "exponent", 8), BitFieldDesc(Type.Bool, "sign",

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 07:49:02 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf Thoughts? Looks like a hybrid between imperative and declarative macros. It's natural for C++ to add lots of syntax, but

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 18:24:02 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 05:38:10PM +, Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d wrote: [...] Not necessarily. Perhaps "IR" is the wrong term to use, as in compiler parlance it means something very close to machine code, but the idea is

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 2017-07-28 09:49, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf Thoughts? Since no one else has mentioned it yet, I'm going to: it looks suspiciously like AST macros :). -- /Jacob Carlborg

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On 2017-07-28 12:30, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: This was arguably the most talked about keynote in ACCU history. I had to close the questions after 75 minutes, and even then it went on longer. Quite unfortunate that the questions did not appear in the video. -- /Jacob Carlborg

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 05:38:10PM +, Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 17:18:35 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > > > But having a standardized IR that's available at the language level > > gives you much, much, more possibilities than merely metaclasses. > > You

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 17:18:35 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: But having a standardized IR that's available at the language level gives you much, much, more possibilities than merely metaclasses. You would be able to define foreach loops for ranges without baked-in compiler support, for

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 07:49:02AM +, Yuxuan Shui via Digitalmars-d wrote: > Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: > https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf > > Thoughts? This is very interesting, both as a subject in and of itself, and also in terms of the

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 16:04:00 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:41:28 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:12:29 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:09:32 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:46:46 UTC, Stefan Koch

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:41:28 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:12:29 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:09:32 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:46:46 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:39:04 UTC, 12345swordy

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:12:29 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:09:32 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:46:46 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:39:04 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: [...] Yes we can do that with mixins __traits and

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 15:09:32 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:46:46 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:39:04 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 07:49:02 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++:

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:46:46 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:39:04 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 07:49:02 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 14:39:04 UTC, 12345swordy wrote: On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 07:49:02 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf Thoughts? Can D achieve this "metaclasses" using templates and

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 07:49:02 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote: Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf Thoughts? Can D achieve this "metaclasses" using templates and mixins? I not familiar of any features that D can use to

Re: [OT] Generative C++

On Fri, 2017-07-28 at 07:49 +, Yuxuan Shui via Digitalmars-d wrote: > Someone made an interesting proposal to C++:  > https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf > > Thoughts? Herb did the closing keynote at ACCU 2017 on this, the video just had the embargo released. See

[OT] Generative C++

Someone made an interesting proposal to C++: https://herbsutter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/p0707r1.pdf Thoughts?