On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 08:20:32 UTC, LiNbO3 wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 06:42:10 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:38:03 UTC, Jerry wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:14:33 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/19/2016 11:12 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
I split this from the "Re: A betterC modular standard library?"
topic because my response is will be too much off-topic but the
whole thread is irking me the wrong way. I see some of the same
argument coming up all the time, with a
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 19:15:37 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 19:11:11 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
Seb just made a giant post listing all the things that could
be done to help improve D, that could to be pinned somewhere
so that everyone can see it. Maybe something
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 19:11:11 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
Seb just made a giant post listing all the things that could be
done to help improve D, that could to be pinned somewhere so
that everyone can see it. Maybe something like that should be
made every time a new high-level vision is
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 18:01:23 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
It's a fair point, but people only know that all these rants
have come up a million times if they've been following the
newsgroup for a while.
It's the kind of thing where most forums have a read me that
says something like, yes we
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 15:44:03 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
I am really tired of this recurring bullshit of random guys
coming up and acting as if they have any right to demand
anything. You distract those few that are willing to do the
work from focusing on it, you are not capable of
On 12/20/2016 7:44 AM, bachmeier wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:52:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
If you don't want to fix anything, ok. But you can still file bugzilla issues
for things that you find.
This is a valid point. I just did that for some std.datetime functions that need
On 12/20/2016 7:17 AM, Benjiro wrote:
I do not recall seeing on the C++ and other forums this constant attitude from
fix it yourselves or put it in the libraries or ...
Oh, it's certainly there. If you want to change C++ or the C++ Standard Library,
you are told to submit a proposal paper to
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:52:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
If you don't want to fix anything, ok. But you can still file
bugzilla issues for things that you find.
This is a valid point. I just did that for some std.datetime
functions that need improved documentation.
On 12/20/2016 05:17 PM, Benjiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:09:45 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
>>
>> Apologies for being one of those who offers advice but no action.
>
> Don't be Dibyendu ...
>
> We "ranters" are actually D's "client base". There seem to be the wrong
>
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 15:17:56 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
I do not recall seeing on the C++ and other forums this
constant attitude from fix it yourselves or put it in the
libraries or ... Its mostly on the smaller languages where they
lack people. And at the same time, that is a very scary
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 10:46:28 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
I realized a while back that this community is incapable of
understanding what is wrong with Dub's documentation.
Many of the top folks don't use it, but I recall Andre commenting
on trying to use it and getting frustrated.
It's
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:09:45 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar
wrote:
Apologies for being one of those who offers advice but no
action.
Don't be Dibyendu ...
We "ranters" are actually D's "client base". There seem to be the
wrong impression by the D-Team, that the "clients" are also the
On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
I split this from the "Re: A betterC modular standard library?"
topic because my response is will be too much off-topic but the
whole thread is irking me the wrong way. I see some of the same
argument coming up all the time, with a
On 12/20/2016 05:53 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On 12/20/2016 12:48 PM, Benjiro wrote:
Actually, i did not vent any anger until this morning when i noticed the
wiseass response. All the points i wrote yesterday are items that
actually bother a lot more people. But those same people who complain
about
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:18:38 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:17:19 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
Michael Parker is working on that from last I heard.
Yes, he is, though slowly. I can give it more priority after
the New Year.
As I recall, you made
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:18:38 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:17:19 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
Michael Parker is working on that from last I heard.
Yes, he is, though slowly. I can give it more priority after
the New Year.
Thanks for doing this!
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:17:19 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
Michael Parker is working on that from last I heard.
Yes, he is, though slowly. I can give it more priority after the
New Year.
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 12:43:38 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/20/16 3:41 AM, Benjiro wrote:
[snip]
Thanks for the rant. Though it was pretty awesome, I too feel
the focus was missing in the sense that I'm unclear on what
steps we can take to alleviate your pain points. Do
On 12/20/16 3:41 AM, Benjiro wrote:
[snip]
Thanks for the rant. Though it was pretty awesome, I too feel the focus
was missing in the sense that I'm unclear on what steps we can take to
alleviate your pain points. Do you want more or less in the language and
the standard library? Do you
On 12/19/16 11:38 PM, Jerry wrote:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16991
Another issue onto the list of thousands, to collect dust for the next
few years til someone decides they want to use their personal time to
fix it.
That's changing because we're starting to have permanent
On 12/20/2016 3:12 AM, bachmeier wrote:
Heck, just pick *one* thing that grinds your gears, like the quotation above,
and fix it.
But I don't use Dub or Git submodules. I use R's package manager, which is both
well-documented and does not require the user to write a configuration file to
use
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 10:46:28 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
Documentation:
--
I realized a while back that this community is incapable of
understanding what is wrong with Dub's documentation.
Michael Parker is
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:00:02 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/20/2016 2:46 AM, bachmeier wrote:
Dub's documentation is simply atrocious *and it's the
official package manager*. Throw around things terms like "you
can use Git
submodules for that" as if it's a trivial thing. But I'm
On 12/20/2016 2:46 AM, bachmeier wrote:
Dub's documentation is simply atrocious *and it's the
official package manager*. Throw around things terms like "you can use Git
submodules for that" as if it's a trivial thing. But I'm not going to say more.
I realized a while back that this community is
On 12/20/2016 12:48 PM, Benjiro wrote:
> Actually, i did not vent any anger until this morning when i noticed the
> wiseass response. All the points i wrote yesterday are items that
> actually bother a lot more people. But those same people who complain
> about it, always get shutdown with that
On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
[...]
Also on YN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13217529
On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
Also on YN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13217529
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 09:33:22 UTC, qznc wrote:
What did you expect with a rant like that?
A rant... Well. Rants have a background.
You vented your anger.
Actually, i did not vent any anger until this morning when i
noticed the wiseass response. All the points i wrote yesterday
On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
Documentation:
--
You forgot one here. Dub's documentation is simply atrocious *and
it's the official package manager*. Throw around things terms
like "you can use Git submodules for that" as if it's a trivial
thing.
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 10:18:12 UTC, Kelly Sommers wrote:
The things I really want from D to really sway me would be the
following (some already exist):
1. Evolve the GC like Go has.
2. No overhead calling C libraries.
3. Easily composable libraries.
4. Good IDE support.
I agree.
1.
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 08:41:21 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 01:45:27 UTC, Tommi wrote:
F*ck this. Its like talking to walls. Anyway, do what you want.
I have my own projects to deal with and i can write around the
lacking libraries, documentation etc.
As an outsider to the D community but someone who has really
wanted to love D the last few years I hope to shed some light
from "outside the bubble" on why I haven't used D and why I use
what I use and what I'm looking for. I hope this can be well
received.
I write a lot of C and Go. But
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 08:41:21 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
F*ck this. Its like talking to walls. Anyway, do what you want.
I have my own projects to deal with and i can write around the
lacking libraries, documentation etc. Unfortunately, not
everybody can and its those people you are
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 01:45:27 UTC, Tommi wrote:
Improve the standard library!
Split the standard library! Forget that no other language does
it!
Add to the standard library!
Add to the standard library!
Add to the standard library!
Improve documentation!
Add to the standard
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 06:42:10 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:38:03 UTC, Jerry wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:14:33 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/19/2016 11:12 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[...]
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 06:42:10 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:38:03 UTC, Jerry wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:14:33 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/19/2016 11:12 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[...]
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:38:03 UTC, Jerry wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:14:33 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/19/2016 11:12 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[...]
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16991
Another issue onto the list of thousands, to collect
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 04:14:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/19/2016 11:12 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/19/2016 10:56 PM, Suliman wrote:
The whole focus on C++ people marketing is simply wrong!
Every time
this gets mentioned in external forums, the language gets a
On 12/19/2016 11:12 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/19/2016 10:56 PM, Suliman wrote:
The whole focus on C++ people marketing is simply wrong! Every time
this gets mentioned in external forums, the language gets a pounding
by people with the same argumentation. Why go for D when C++ 20xx
On 12/19/2016 10:56 PM, Suliman wrote:
The whole focus on C++ people marketing is simply wrong! Every time
this gets mentioned in external forums, the language gets a pounding
by people with the same argumentation. Why go for D when C++ 20xx
version does it also.
+100
I totally agree with
The whole focus on C++ people marketing is simply wrong! Every
time this gets mentioned in external forums, the language gets a
pounding by people with the same argumentation. Why go for D
when C++ 20xx version does it also.
+100
I totally agree with another part of post. Plus the docs is
On 12/19/2016 06:19 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
Vim: Lets not go there.
Why not? If you already know vim at least, it is very easy to use with D
- things just work quite well out of the box.
Try remote editing D and see how much fun
On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
Vim: Lets not go there.
Why not? If you already know vim at least, it is very easy to use
with D - things just work quite well out of the box.
Try remote editing D and see how much fun it is.
works in vim out of the box...
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 01:45:27 UTC, Tommi wrote:
Half of the paragraphs contradict the other half. Walter must
headbutt himself in the face reading this.
You may want to try to understand all paragraphs together as a
solid text.
I see a lot of people arguing a lot about D and sorry to say
but at times it sounds like a kindergarten. Walter/Andrei are
right that updates and changes need to be focused on the
standard library.
Improve the standard library!
Some of the proposals sounds very correct. The library needs to
I split this from the "Re: A betterC modular standard library?"
topic because my response is will be too much off-topic but the
whole thread is irking me the wrong way. I see some of the same
argument coming up all the time, with a level of frequency.
D has not market:
-
A
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at 18:53:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 10/8/16 2:49 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 10/8/16 1:22 PM, Martin Nowak wrote:
Integrating this with a pre-compiled ldc library is a
fantastic idea
OTOH.
If we can make this work, it will be much less effort and
On 10/10/16 2:05 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at 18:53:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
(after thinking a bit more) ... but Mir seems to rely in good part on
templates, which makes pre-compiled libraries less effective. -- Andrei
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at 18:53:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
(after thinking a bit more) ... but Mir seems to rely in good
part on templates, which makes pre-compiled libraries less
effective. -- Andrei
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at 18:53:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at 18:10:14 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
https://github.com/MartinNowak/druntime/blob/23373260e65af5edea989b61d6660832fedbec15/src/core/internal/arrayop.d#L78.
Could you please give an example how it works for user?
I mean aligned vs unaligned.
???
You could pack
On Monday, 10 October 2016 at 05:20:56 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
(after thinking a bit more) ... but Mir seems to rely in good
part on templates, which makes pre-compiled libraries less
effective. -- Andrei
Exactly, this is what I was wondering. Maybe it uses a finite
set of precompilable
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at 18:53:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
You mean dmd/ldc/etc interop at binary level? Yes, that would
be pretty
Should already work, but of courses isn't well tested.
(after thinking a bit more) ... but Mir seems to rely in good
part on templates, which makes
On 9/28/2016 2:48 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 09:41:02 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2016-09-28 11:06, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Done. Full DMD performance Issues related to Mir list can be found here
On 10/8/2016 10:26 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
See
https://github.com/MartinNowak/druntime/blob/23373260e65af5edea989b61d6660832fedbec15/src/core/internal/arrayop.d#L78.
Further information should be posted here:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16558
On 10/8/16 2:49 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 10/8/16 1:22 PM, Martin Nowak wrote:
Integrating this with a pre-compiled ldc library is a fantastic idea
OTOH.
If we can make this work, it will be much less effort and yield the
fastest implementation. Also would speed up the development cycle
On 10/8/16 1:22 PM, Martin Nowak wrote:
Integrating this with a pre-compiled ldc library is a fantastic idea OTOH.
If we can make this work, it will be much less effort and yield the
fastest implementation. Also would speed up the development cycle a bit
b/c the kernels don't need to be
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at 17:28:14 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 20:11:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
Yes, the same true for Mir too. A precompiled library based on
top of Mir GLAS can be used with DMD.
Is this feasible, i.e. is there a finite amount of kernels
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 at 17:26:17 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 18:43:38 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
4. Generic unaligned load/store like (like LDC loadUnaligned
and storeUnaligned)
See
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 20:11:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
Yes, the same true for Mir too. A precompiled library based on
top of Mir GLAS can be used with DMD.
Is this feasible, i.e. is there a finite amount of kernels that
we can precompile and use?
I thought the kernels were fully
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 18:43:38 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
4. Generic unaligned load/store like (like LDC loadUnaligned
and storeUnaligned)
See
https://github.com/MartinNowak/druntime/blob/23373260e65af5edea989b61d6660832fedbec15/src/core/internal/arrayop.d#L78.
On Thursday, 29 September 2016 at 09:22:56 UTC, Martin Nowak
wrote:
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 22:34:59 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
That would work out as long as interaction is seamless. Please
advise. Overall: I think Ilya's work can make a real
difference for D, and we can't afford
On Thursday, 29 September 2016 at 09:22:56 UTC, Martin Nowak
wrote:
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 22:34:59 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
That would work out as long as interaction is seamless. Please
advise. Overall: I think Ilya's work can make a real
difference for D, and we can't afford
On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 09:04:23 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 15:31:41 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/27/16 12:36 PM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:20:09 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/27/16 10:50 AM, Ilya
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 22:34:59 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
That would work out as long as interaction is seamless. Please
advise. Overall: I think Ilya's work can make a real difference
for D, and we can't afford it to not work with the reference
implementation. -- Andrei
There
On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 09:41:02 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2016-09-28 11:06, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Done. Full DMD performance Issues related to Mir list can be
found here
https://github.com/libmir/mir/wiki/Compiler-and-druntime-bugs#dmd-performance-issues
It found be better
On 2016-09-28 11:06, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Done. Full DMD performance Issues related to Mir list can be found here
https://github.com/libmir/mir/wiki/Compiler-and-druntime-bugs#dmd-performance-issues
It found be better to use the tag field in bugzilla instead of putting
"[Mir]" in the
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:36:09 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/27/2016 2:21 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Bug report for (5)
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16550 :
Thank you. Please see my comment on it. Also, please tag all
SIMD Bugzilla issues with the SIMD keyword (I
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 15:31:41 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/27/16 12:36 PM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:20:09 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/27/16 10:50 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 07:01:08 UTC, Jacob
On 9/27/16 12:36 PM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:20:09 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/27/16 10:50 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 07:01:08 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2016-09-26 21:49, bachmeier wrote:
[...]
He mentions
On 9/27/16 12:48 PM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:44:28 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 01:17:16 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I'm not going to argue this much further. Essentially Mir is touted
as a highly generic and portable
On 9/27/16 1:33 PM, Johan Engelen wrote:
I thought so too but if the algorithm is 50x slower, it probably means
you can't develop that algorithm any more (I wouldn't). I think the
common use-case for Mir is a calculation that takes seconds, so 50x
turns a test into a run of several minutes,
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 13:36:50 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
If it has runtime dispatch, it will work everywhere.
I'm sorry but, like others, clearly you have not understood the
issue.
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 11:33:54 UTC, Johan Engelen
wrote:
An extra subjective comment from recent experience: I think LDC
has been very responsive to Mir's needs, thinking _with_ Mir
development instead of fighting it and debating things to
death. Imagine you are developing Mir, want
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:48:40 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:44:28 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 01:17:16 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
I'm not going to argue this much further. Essentially Mir is
touted as a highly
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:44:28 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 01:17:16 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
I'm not going to argue this much further. Essentially Mir is
touted as a highly generic and portable library. Having it
only work on one language
On 9/27/2016 3:36 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Will fill them tomorrow --Ilya
Thank you. Looking forward to it.
On 9/27/2016 3:48 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
50 times slower for modern CPUs.
I understand, and that's a drastic speed difference. But removing support for
dmd can have the effect of balkanizing the D community. That's happened in the
past, and it was terrible for all of us.
I have looked
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:44:28 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 01:17:16 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
I'm not going to argue this much further. Essentially Mir is
touted as a highly generic and portable library. Having it
only work on one language
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 01:17:16 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
I'm not going to argue this much further. Essentially Mir is
touted as a highly generic and portable library. Having it only
work on one language implementation works against that
statement, the credibility of Mir, and
On 9/27/2016 3:20 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Can we make sure all issues that Mir has with dmd and gdc be present in bugzilla
and tagged with "Mir"? Thanks! -- Andrei
The ones I've seen so far have all been SIMD issues, and I've been tagging them
that way.
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 10:20:09 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/27/16 10:50 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 07:01:08 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2016-09-26 21:49, bachmeier wrote:
[...]
He mentions several front end issues, those apply to LDC as
On 9/27/2016 2:21 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Bug report for (5) https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16550 :
Thank you. Please see my comment on it. Also, please tag all SIMD Bugzilla
issues with the SIMD keyword (I already did it for 16550).
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 18:43:38 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
1. Lightweight `nothrow @nogc` threads, implemented using
`struct`s
2. Lightweight `nothrow @nogc` mutexes and barriers,
implemented using `struct`s
FWIW I have some @nogc mutex and semaphore here:
On 9/27/16 10:50 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 07:01:08 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2016-09-26 21:49, bachmeier wrote:
To me, it seems pointless to support Mir in DMD. The "functionality"
that it brings is speed. Nobody needing absolutely the fastest code is
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 09:20:28 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2016-09-27 10:50, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
No, LDC for example does not have the issue
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16488 and others too.
Does LDC has: "Lightweight `nothrow @nogc` threads, implemented
using
On 2016-09-27 10:53, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
They are (except Win32?), but we need to exclude DRuntime dependency.
Mir does not use Druntime and will not use it anyway because DRuntime is
not `nothrow @nogc`.
I tried this using ldc 1.1.0 beta 2 (Frontend, druntime and Phobos are
at version
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 03:49:18 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/26/2016 11:43 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
I think we need to make it a point to support Mir in dmd. --
Andrei
Required features for Level 3:
1. https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16489
2.
On 2016-09-27 10:50, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
No, LDC for example does not have the issue
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16488 and others too.
Does LDC has: "Lightweight `nothrow @nogc` threads, implemented using
`struct`s" ?
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 08:53:36 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 07:01:37 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2016-09-27 02:52, Joakim wrote:
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 20:11:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
Yes, the same true for Mir too. A precompiled
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 07:01:37 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2016-09-27 02:52, Joakim wrote:
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 20:11:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
Yes, the same true for Mir too. A precompiled library based
on top of
Mir GLAS can be used with DMD.
Are you sure
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 07:01:08 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2016-09-26 21:49, bachmeier wrote:
To me, it seems pointless to support Mir in DMD. The
"functionality"
that it brings is speed. Nobody needing absolutely the fastest
code is
not going to have any interest in DMD. From
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 08:40:38 UTC, Temtaime wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 01:17:16 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/27/16 2:52 AM, Joakim wrote:
Why not? I think people will understand that ldc is meant
for higher
performance, which you want from such code anyway.
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 01:17:16 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/27/16 2:52 AM, Joakim wrote:
Why not? I think people will understand that ldc is meant for
higher
performance, which you want from such code anyway.
I'm not going to argue this much further. Essentially Mir is
On 2016-09-27 02:52, Joakim wrote:
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 20:11:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Yes, the same true for Mir too. A precompiled library based on top of
Mir GLAS can be used with DMD.
Are you sure about this? I thought there were ABI incompatibilities
between D
On 2016-09-26 21:49, bachmeier wrote:
To me, it seems pointless to support Mir in DMD. The "functionality"
that it brings is speed. Nobody needing absolutely the fastest code is
not going to have any interest in DMD. From what I understand of Mir
(but correct me if I'm wrong) it is easy enough
On 9/26/2016 11:43 AM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
I think we need to make it a point to support Mir in dmd. -- Andrei
Required features for Level 3:
1. https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16489
2. https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16488
3. AVX & AVX2 floating point vector arithmetic
4.
Can dcompute even be compiled by stock ldc? If so, you should
change the documents as code.dlang.org suggests otherwise.
PR is open, CI is green, but needs some more work before it will
be accepted.
As I understand it dcompute is a GPU library. Not everyone
will want to or need GPU for
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 18:43:38 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
5. LDC compiler support for ARM, MIPS, MIPS64, Alpha
Alpha CPU nowadays? I supposed it is died forever, except small
amount of old hardware.
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 at 01:55:17 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
On Monday, 26 September 2016 at 22:34:59 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/26/16 10:11 PM, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
A precompiled library based on top of Mir GLAS can be used
with DMD.
That would work out as long as
101 - 200 of 314 matches
Mail list logo
