As someone learning D, I thought I would give my insight in how I
came to D.
My biggest reason for choosing D is the GC. I have come from Java
and don't quite believe that I'm ready to manage my own memory
throughout an entire program, but the ability to disconnect from
the GC is a great way
On 06/06/2016 09:15, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
* Tooling is immature and of poorer quality compared to the
> competition.
This is true.
We have too many half-finished attempt at things, basically because
everything is volunteer, not directly associated with work, activity.
Nothing
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 08:09:49 UTC, Ethan Watson wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 07:57:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
C++ still suffers from:
http://www.digitalmars.com/articles/b44.html
and probably always will.
template< size_t size > void function( char ( )[ size ]
);
It's
On 06/06/2016 04:15 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
3. Have one lightweight D realized cross platform IDE. Qt us probably
the best widget set to use for this. My model here is LiteIDE which is
a Qt-based Go IDE realized in C++. It should of course be realized in
Go, but there are no
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 23:05:49 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/7/2016 2:28 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I can attest that figuring out why something isn't inferred
@safe isn't always
easy, and the "slap a @safe: tag at the top" isn't always
going to help.
Having a -safe compiler
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 20:41:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
In principle, I think that you're very right that @safe needs
to be implemented as a whitelist. Security in general does not
work as a blacklist, and I think that @safe has the same
problem. The problem is code breakage. Even
On Saturday, 11 June 2016 at 12:19:52 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
LOL. 10x that would be cheap in the US, and I don't think that
your average school will let folks sit in on courses (though
some will). For your average college in the US, I would only
expect anyone to take classes if they're
On Saturday, 11 June 2016 at 12:44:54 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:29:01 UTC, Chris wrote:
DScript. Your scripting language already fulfills things that
were on my wishlist (easy D interop).
hey, both GML and DACS has some of that too! ;-)
VM["print"] = (string s) {
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 17:09:18 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
Whatever you read, the writer didn't really know what they were
talking about. At least not in general, and if they were
talking of the Javaverse as a whole. Java 8 features such as
lambda expressions, Streams, method references,
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:29:01 UTC, Chris wrote:
DScript. Your scripting language already fulfills things that
were on my wishlist (easy D interop).
hey, both GML and DACS has some of that too! ;-)
VM["print"] = (string s) { writeln(s); };
VM["add"] = (int a, int b) => a+b;
wow, now we
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:35:32 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:14:02 UTC, ketmar wrote:
1. this is heavily OT. ;-)
I didn't forget to mark it! :-)
2. you may take a look at my gml engine. it has clearly
separated language parser and AST builder (gaem.parser), and
On Saturday, June 11, 2016 08:06:21 Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 18:59:02 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > then as it is later. In some ways, it would actually be very
> > beneficial to actually go back to school to study that stuff
> > after having
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 18:59:02 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
then as it is later. In some ways, it would actually be very
beneficial to actually go back to school to study that stuff
after having programmed professionally for a while, but that's
a pain to pull off time-wise, and the
On 6/10/2016 3:55 AM, Chris wrote:
Cool. I'd love to see `DScript` one day - and replace JS once and for all ...
well ... just day dreaming ...
Started a new thread for that.
On Friday, June 10, 2016 17:20:29 Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:27:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > Most developers have titles like "Software Engineer" or "Senior
> > Softweer Engineer." They'e frequently called programmers and/or
> > software
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 17:59:15 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
What's the PrototypeObject sc I see everywhere doing?
sc is short for "scope" - it refers to the chain of local
variables. So consider the following:
[snip]
Cool. Thanks.
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 17:36:02 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
Ah, it produces mixin("1+2") and evaluates that.
Sort of, 1 and 2 are both runtime variables there so it really
produces mixin("a+b") after setting a = 1 and b = 2 above.
But yeah, that's the idea - it just hoists that mixin to runtime
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 17:02:06 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
https://github.com/adamdruppe/arsd/blob/master/script.d#L879
The function is pretty simple: interpret the left hand side
(here it is 1, so it yields int(1)), interpret the right hand
side (yields int(2)), combine them with the
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 17:10:39 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:30:19 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
I use it in my toml parser and it's very pleasant. I figured
it probably isn't very fast, but it works and that's important.
kewl! Did you use the script component for
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:27:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Most developers have titles like "Software Engineer" or "Senior
Softweer Engineer." They'e frequently called programmers and/or
software developers when not talking about titles.
Neither academia or businesses use Computer
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:30:19 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
globals.write = &(writeln!string);
Woah, I never thought of using it like that!
Yeah, since writeln is a template, you need to instantiate it
with some arguments. This isn't the ideal way to do it in the
script btw, it'd be like:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:29:01 UTC, Chris wrote:
But seriously, would you like to work on something like
DScript. Your scripting language already fulfills things that
were on my wishlist (easy D interop).
I'm best when working on something that I'm actively using, since
then I find the
On Tue, 2016-06-07 at 15:15 +, Chris via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
[…]
> Java has lambdas now (since version 8, I think) and I read
> somewhere that it's not certain that Java programmers will adopt
> (i.e. use) them at all. D has the advantage that its users are
> […]
Whatever you read, the
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:03:30 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
Let's say you have something simple like 1+2, you would build
an AST that looks something like
+
/ \
1 2
What would be the next step?
https://github.com/adamdruppe/arsd/blob/master/script.d#L879
The function is pretty simple:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:35:32 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:14:02 UTC, ketmar wrote:
1. this is heavily OT. ;-)
I didn't forget to mark it! :-)
Well, yeah, we should start a new thread, but compiler
programming isn't really off topic at all on a forum where we
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:40:45 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
He linked it earlier:
http://repo.or.cz/gaemu.git/tree/HEAD:/gaem/parser
-Wyatt
Cheers.
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:35:32 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:14:02 UTC, ketmar wrote:
2. you may take a look at my gml engine. it has clearly
separated language parser and AST builder (gaem.parser), and
AST->VM compiler (gaem.runner/compiler.d).
I couldn't for the
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:14:02 UTC, ketmar wrote:
1. this is heavily OT. ;-)
I didn't forget to mark it! :-)
2. you may take a look at my gml engine. it has clearly
separated language parser and AST builder (gaem.parser), and
AST->VM compiler (gaem.runner/compiler.d).
I couldn't for
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 14:34:53 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
var globals = var.emptyObject;
globals.write = &(writeln!string);
Woah, I never thought of using it like that!
The downside though is that it is something I basically slapped
together in a weekend to support var.eval on a lark...
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 14:25:37 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 13:55:28 UTC, Chris wrote:
I have neither time nor the required expertise to write a
scripting language from scratch ;) You on the other hand ...
:-)
Oh, it isn't that hard, at least to do a quick basic
On Friday, June 10, 2016 07:45:03 Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 05:37:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > I assume that you're not from the US?
>
> Right, I am in Oslo (Norway).
>
> > In the US at least, professional programmers are almost always
> >
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:03:30 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 14:25:37 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
To make an interpreter, you can just add a method to the AST
objects that interprets and gives a result boom, it works!
Given my limited knowledge of
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 15:03:30 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 14:25:37 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
To make an interpreter, you can just add a method to the AST
objects that interprets and gives a result boom, it works!
Given my limited knowledge of
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 14:25:37 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
To make an interpreter, you can just add a method to the AST
objects that interprets and gives a result boom, it works!
Given my limited knowledge of compilers/interpreters, this part
kind of seems like magic.
Let's say you
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 11:11:49 UTC, Chris wrote:
Nice. Anyone interested in turning this into "DScript"? Having
a scripting language powered by D would also boost D's
prestige. And it would be easy to write modules in pure D.
So I use my toy thing from time to time and it is pretty cool.
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 13:55:28 UTC, Chris wrote:
I have neither time nor the required expertise to write a
scripting language from scratch ;) You on the other hand ... :-)
Oh, it isn't that hard, at least to do a quick basic thing. You
might want to start with the various math parsers. A
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 08:29:50 UTC, Yura wrote:
Another things where I do almost all my mistakes is: array
bounding/calling the memory which was free => the result is
undefined behavior. If I remember correctly the D is better
with that respect?
I think slices and automatic bound
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 13:55:28 UTC, Chris wrote:
I have neither time nor the required expertise to write a
scripting language from scratch ;) You on the other hand ... :-)
so just use Adam's code as the starting point then! ;-)
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 11:20:35 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 11:11:49 UTC, Chris wrote:
Nice. Anyone interested in turning this into "DScript"? Having
a scripting language powered by D would also boost D's
prestige. And it would be easy to write modules in pure D.
On Tue, 2016-06-07 at 11:21 +, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 11:11:31 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-06-07 at 09:55 +, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
> > wrote:
> > >
> > […]
> > > considering that the whole package, including dlangUI, is one
> > >
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 11:11:49 UTC, Chris wrote:
Nice. Anyone interested in turning this into "DScript"? Having
a scripting language powered by D would also boost D's
prestige. And it would be easy to write modules in pure D.
DScript could then be used by scientists, game developers etc.
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 11:05:27 UTC, ketmar wrote:
Adam has scripting engine in his arsd repo[1]. it's not a speed
demon, but it is much more like JS, it even has exceptions, and
it is very easy to integrate it with D code. you may take a
look at it too. afair, you only need jsvar.d and
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 10:55:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
Cool. I'd love to see `DScript` one day - and replace JS once
and for all ... well ... just day dreaming ...
Adam has scripting engine in his arsd repo[1]. it's not a speed
demon, but it is much more like JS, it even has exceptions, and
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 10:21:07 UTC, ketmar wrote:
i have several of them, actually. yet they are very specialized
— i.e. designed to support my game engines, not to be
"wide-area scripting languages".
publicly accessible are:
DACS[1] — statically typed, with modules and UFCS, and JIT
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 10:03:29 UTC, Chris wrote:
A scripting language based on D? Is it open source? I've always
dreamt of something like that.
i have several of them, actually. yet they are very specialized —
i.e. designed to support my game engines, not to be "wide-area
scripting
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 09:46:11 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 09:35:32 UTC, Chris wrote:
And also, always use ldc or gdc, once your project is ready to
go. dmd generated code is slow as it is only a reference
compiler.
but not *dog* *slow*. ;-) if one don't really need to
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 09:35:32 UTC, Chris wrote:
And also, always use ldc or gdc, once your project is ready to
go. dmd generated code is slow as it is only a reference
compiler.
but not *dog* *slow*. ;-) if one don't really need to squeeze
every possible cycle out of CPU, DMD-generated
And also, always use ldc or gdc, once your project is ready to
go. dmd generated code is slow as it is only a reference compiler.
http://dlang.org/download.html
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 16:44:23 UTC, Yura wrote:
Hello,
I have to stress I am beginner in programming, mainly
interested in number crunching in academia (at least so far). I
started to write a small project in D, but had to switch to C
for few reasons:
1) Importance for my CV. I know
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 08:29:50 UTC, Yura wrote:
something tells me that GC would slow you down
because in this field people are fighting for every
percent of the performance (many simulations are
running for weeks).
yes, GC will have an effect for such things. but then, people
fighting
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 06:37:08 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 06:25:55 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 16:44:23 UTC, Yura wrote:
4) The C language is well tested and rock solid stable.
loool.
ah, sorry, let me explain myself. i hit ALOT of gcc bugs in
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 05:37:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I assume that you're not from the US?
Right, I am in Oslo (Norway).
In the US at least, professional programmers are almost always
referred to officially as software engineers (though they use
the term programmers informally
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 06:25:55 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 16:44:23 UTC, Yura wrote:
4) The C language is well tested and rock solid stable.
loool.
ah, sorry, let me explain myself. i hit ALOT of gcc bugs in my
life. and i never fixed any of them myself, 'cause
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 16:44:23 UTC, Yura wrote:
4) The C language is well tested and rock solid stable.
loool.
On Friday, June 10, 2016 02:38:28 Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 21:54:05 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> > On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 21:46:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> >> Programming is a mix of engineering and craft. There are
> >> people who do
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 21:54:05 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 21:46:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Programming is a mix of engineering and craft. There are
people who do research into programming theory, and those are
computer scientists. I'm not one of them. Andrei
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 21:46:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Programming is a mix of engineering and craft. There are people
who do research into programming theory, and those are computer
scientists. I'm not one of them. Andrei is.
Unfortunately, the term "software engineer" is a LOT less
On 6/9/2016 1:38 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote:
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 18:02:05 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
You are a scientist, so try to measure. GC generally improves throughput at
the cost of latency.
As a side note, I always found it funny that programmers call themselves
"computer scientists"
On 6/9/2016 9:44 AM, Yura wrote:
4) The C language is well tested and rock solid stable. However, if you
encounter a potential bug in D, I am not sure how long would it take to fix.
Thanks for taking the time to post here.
Yes, there are bugs in D. Having dealt with buggy compilers from every
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 20:38:30 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 18:02:05 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
You are a scientist, so try to measure. GC generally improves
throughput at the cost of latency.
As a side note, I always found it funny that programmers call
themselves
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 18:02:05 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
You are a scientist, so try to measure. GC generally improves
throughput at the cost of latency.
As a side note, I always found it funny that programmers call
themselves "computer scientists" while many write a lot of their
programs
On Thursday, 9 June 2016 at 16:44:23 UTC, Yura wrote:
5) Garbage collector - it will slow my number crunching down.
You are a scientist, so try to measure. GC generally improves
throughput at the cost of latency.
On Monday, 6 June 2016 at 02:20:52 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Andrei posted this on another thread. I felt it deserved its
own thread. It's very important.
-
I go to conferences. Train and consult at large companies.
On 6/8/16 3:43 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 08.06.2016 01:59, Walter Bright wrote:
...
I suspect D has long since passed point where it is too complicated for
the rather limited ability of mathematicians to prove things about it.
The main reason why it is currently impractical to prove things
On Wednesday, 8 June 2016 at 13:43:27 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 08.06.2016 01:59, Walter Bright wrote:
...
I suspect D has long since passed point where it is too
complicated for
the rather limited ability of mathematicians to prove things
about it.
The main reason why it is currently
On 08.06.2016 01:59, Walter Bright wrote:
...
I suspect D has long since passed point where it is too complicated for
the rather limited ability of mathematicians to prove things about it.
The main reason why it is currently impractical to prove things about D
is that D is not really a
On 08.06.2016 02:39, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/7/2016 4:07 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It is my opinion that writing off formal proofs of safety is a
mistake. Clearly
we don't have the capability on the core team to work on such.
However, I am
very interested if you'd want to lead such an
On 6/8/16 1:50 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
I'll probably do it at some point. (However, first I need to figure out
what the formal language specification should actually be, this is one
reason why I'm implementing a D compiler.)
That's very very promising. Looking forward to anything in that area!
On 08.06.2016 01:07, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 6/8/16 12:53 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 08.06.2016 00:47, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/7/2016 3:23 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Obviously they proved the virtual machine itself memory safe,
As I recall, the proof was broken, not the implementation.
On Wednesday, 8 June 2016 at 00:39:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On the contrary, I think a formal proof would be very valuable.
I am just skeptical of the notion that a proof is automatically
correct. I've read about mistakes being found in many published
mathematical proofs. I read somewhere
Jack Stouffer wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 13:39:19 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I just read elsewhere that a GSoC student is working to achieve the
goal of making the GC swappable and adding Reiner's precise scanning
GC. I consider this to be essential work, I hope we can get this
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 21:00:06 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Actually, I'm not sure how much of Phobos actually depends on the GC.
> Most of the stuff I use frequently are from std.range and std.algorithm,
> and we've pretty much gotten rid of GC-dependence from most of the stuff
>
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 07:24:55PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 19:04:06 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > I think far too much energy has been spent arguing for a GC-less
> > language than actually writing the code that would fix its
> >
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 19:04:06 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> I think far too much energy has been spent arguing for a GC-less
> language than actually writing the code that would fix its associated
> performance issues, and my suspicion is that this is mostly caused by
> your typical
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 07:00:13PM -0700, Charles Hixson via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 06/05/2016 09:17 PM, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > On Monday, 6 June 2016 at 02:30:55 UTC, Pie? wrote:
> > > Duh! The claim is made that D can work without the GC... but
> > > that's a red
On 06/05/2016 09:17 PM, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Monday, 6 June 2016 at 02:30:55 UTC, Pie? wrote:
Duh! The claim is made that D can work without the GC... but that's a
red herring... If you take about the GC what do you have?
Like 90% of the language, still generally nicer
On 6/7/2016 4:07 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It is my opinion that writing off formal proofs of safety is a mistake. Clearly
we don't have the capability on the core team to work on such. However, I am
very interested if you'd want to lead such an effort.
On the contrary, I think a formal
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 20:41:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
The point being that a culture of "best practices" does arise
and evolve over time, and professional programmers know it.
Sure, that's one of the big advantages C++ has over D: people
have that institutional knowledge.
But, two
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 16:04:05 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 6/7/2016 1:48 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > So, while mass applying something like @safe temporarily to check stuff
> > makes some sense, I really don't think that it's a good idea to do it in
> >
On 6/7/2016 4:01 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Yeah. I recall an article by Joel Spoelsky where he talks about deciding
that proofs of correctness weren't worth much, because they were even harder
to get right than the software.
I do think that there are situations where proofs
On 6/7/16 7:05 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/7/2016 2:28 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I can attest that figuring out why something isn't inferred @safe
isn't always
easy, and the "slap a @safe: tag at the top" isn't always going to help.
Having a -safe compiler switch to make @safe the
On 6/8/16 12:53 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 08.06.2016 00:47, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/7/2016 3:23 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Obviously they proved the virtual machine itself memory safe,
As I recall, the proof was broken, not the implementation.
Which time?
That is an old result that has
On 6/7/2016 3:10 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
If you think progress on this matters, why are you arguing against it?
I don't believe it is worth the effort. You do. You need to make a better case
for it, and the best way to do that is to actually write a spec. Demanding that
someone (i.e. me) who
On 6/7/2016 1:48 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
So, while mass applying something like @safe temporarily to check stuff
makes some sense, I really don't think that it's a good idea to do it in any
code that you'd ever commit.
The downsides you listed do not apply to @safe.
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 15:47:10 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 6/7/2016 3:23 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> > Obviously they proved the virtual machine itself memory safe,
>
> As I recall, the proof was broken, not the implementation. People do make
> mistakes and overlook cases with
On 08.06.2016 00:47, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/7/2016 3:23 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Obviously they proved the virtual machine itself memory safe,
As I recall, the proof was broken, not the implementation.
Which time?
People do
make mistakes and overlook cases with proofs. There's nothing
On 08.06.2016 00:44, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/7/2016 11:32 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
mixin("@tru"~"sted void foo(){ ... }");
So grep for mixin, too. Not hard.
Huge amounts of false positives.
On 6/7/2016 3:23 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Obviously they proved the virtual machine itself memory safe,
As I recall, the proof was broken, not the implementation. People do make
mistakes and overlook cases with proofs. There's nothing magical about them.
On 6/7/2016 11:32 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
mixin("@tru"~"sted void foo(){ ... }");
So grep for mixin, too. Not hard.
On 6/7/2016 12:56 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Bug? I would have expected @nogc: to permeate.
It did originally, but that was removed. It's deliberate.
On 07.06.2016 22:36, Walter Bright wrote:
...
BTW, it is a nice idea to require mathematical proofs of code
properties, but real world programming languages have turned out to be
remarkably resistant to construction of such proofs. As I recall, Java
had initially proven that Java was memory
On 07.06.2016 21:52, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/7/2016 11:32 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
The @safe subset should be specified and
implemented by inclusion, such that it is obvious that it does the
right thing.
I don't know what's 'unspecific' about this.
Closing holes one-by-one is not the
right
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 17:28:27 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 6/7/16 5:10 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 20:52:15 Dave via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 20:48:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> >>> On
On 6/7/16 5:10 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 20:52:15 Dave via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 20:48:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 18:33:01 Dave via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
IMHO, it's bad practice to
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 20:52:15 Dave via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 20:48:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 18:33:01 Dave via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >> [...]
> >
> > IMHO, it's bad practice to mass apply attributes with labels or
> > blocks.
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 20:55:12 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
repeat10:{
N:<{ n:@int; do 10->n; inner; exit n};
i:@int;
do N -> iterate{ do inner; }
}
repeat99:repeat10{
N:<{ do 99->n; inner; }
}
repeat99{ do i -> print; "bottles of wine" ->print }
Adding some comments, as
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 19:52:47 UTC, Chris wrote:
But we agree that templates are a good idea in general,
regardless of the actual implementation.
Having access to parametric abstractions is a good idea. How to
best use them is not so obvious... in real projects where things
changes.
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 20:48:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 18:33:01 Dave via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
IMHO, it's bad practice to mass apply attributes with labels or
blocks. It's far too easy to accidentally mark a function with
an attribute that you didn't
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 20:41:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Would you want to use a library where the maintainers refuse to
use @nogc even if they aren't using the gc?
yes, i do. i'm actively using Adam's arsd libraries, and they
doesn't have @nogc spam all over the place, even where
On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 18:33:01 Dave via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 18:24:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> > On 6/7/2016 11:19 AM, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 18:15:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>
> >> But you can't grep for @system
1 - 100 of 354 matches
Mail list logo
