I think there is no need in language changes. Everythink can be
implemented via library.
What is needed:
- base agent class
- base behaviors
- runtime that provide ability to run independent agents even in
single-thread mode. Number of agents can be greater then number of
treads. so
On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 23:19:41 -0800, Vladimir Panteleev
vladi...@thecybershadow.net wrote:
On Monday, 19 December 2011 at 07:11:10 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
It seems to me that no one else is interested...
Not true :)
Hehe, I mean't outside the D community. I can think of five people off
On Monday, 19 December 2011 at 07:27:14 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 23:19:41 -0800, Vladimir Panteleev
vladi...@thecybershadow.net wrote:
On Monday, 19 December 2011 at 07:11:10 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
It seems to me that no one else is interested...
Not true :)
Hehe, I
On 2011-12-19 00:19, Adam Wilson wrote:
On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 15:02:17 -0800, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote:
On 12/18/2011 11:53 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sunday, 18 December 2011 at 20:32:18 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
That is an interesting opportunity. At any rate, I am 100%
On 12/18/2011 01:09 AM, Ruslan Mullakhmetov wrote:
Hi all,
I want to ask you about D future, i mean next big iteration of D and
propose some new feature, agent-based programming. Currently, after
introducing C++11 i see the only advantages of D over C++11 except
syntax sugare is garbage
Ruslan Mullakhmetov Wrote:
Currently, after
introducing C++11 i see the only advantages of D over C++11 except
syntax sugare is garbage collector and modules.
So you are saying that sane templates, range based standard library and
concurrency improvements (thread local variables,
On 12/18/2011 02:42 AM, a wrote:
Ruslan Mullakhmetov Wrote:
Currently, after
introducing C++11 i see the only advantages of D over C++11 except
syntax sugare is garbage collector and modules.
So you are saying that sane templates, range based standard library and
concurrency improvements
On Sunday, December 18, 2011 04:09:21 Ruslan Mullakhmetov wrote:
I want to ask you about D future
It will be years before we seriously start looking at D3, and while there are
ideas for what we might like to do with it, it's far too early to say what's
likely to happen with it. D2 needs
Andrei,
I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you forecasting
future functionality that arrays will support with your
use of .empty, .back, and .popBack or am I too na�ve to understand
that I need to implement
wrote:
Andrei,
I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you forecasting
future functionality that arrays will support with your use of .empty, .back,
and .popBack or am I too na�ve to understand that I
== Quote from Lutger (lutger.blijdest...@gmail.com)'s article
wrote:
Andrei,
I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you
forecasting
future functionality that arrays will support with your use of
Lutger lutger.blijdest...@gmail.com wrote:
wrote:
Andrei,
I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you
forecasting
future functionality that arrays will support with your use of .empty,
.back,
and
Simen kjaeraas wrote:
Lutger lutger.blijdest...@gmail.com wrote:
wrote:
Andrei,
I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you
forecasting
future functionality that arrays will support with your use of
On 2010-06-27 14:42, Lutger wrote:
Simen kjaeraas wrote:
Lutgerlutger.blijdest...@gmail.com wrote:
wrote:
Andrei,
I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you
forecasting
future functionality that
301 - 314 of 314 matches
Mail list logo
