On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 17:31:53 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
In a similar vein, I have to say I'm thoroughly impressed with
what I've learned of Mir. AIUI, aside from being a fantastic
lib, it looks like a
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
In a similar vein, I have to say I'm thoroughly impressed with
what I've learned of Mir. AIUI, aside from being a fantastic
lib, it looks like a tool with very high widespread potential
that's written in D, yet also
On 4/03/2017 7:10 PM, Patrick Schluter wrote:
The compiler front-end did just that. I can not comment on the quality
of the code but on the speed of compilation, wow, just wow.
Building v2.067 takes 1'38" on the server at work (westmere at 2.2 GHz,
gcc 6.2, dmd v2.073, single core build).
Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
I don't care about existing D users.
i wonder if "existing D users" care about your "betterC" and other
initiatives then.
rethorical sentence, no need to answer to it.
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 05:45:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
I don't care about existing D users. Sorry about that. In the
same time I do not see any problem with betterC for existing D
users. Any betterC library can be used with Druntime like
either a common C library or generic D
On 03/05/2017 09:27 AM, XavierAP wrote:
This reminds me my last discussion with the C++ guru at work... Every
complaint of mine against the language, he argued against in terms of
performance. I felt every argument of this could be reused to abandon
C++ in favor of C (which would make me happy
On 5 March 2017 at 06:45, Ilya Yaroshenko via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 16:43:21 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
>>
>> On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 15:35:13 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
my 1 cent: we should stop trying
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 14:27:28 UTC, XavierAP wrote:
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 05:45:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
1. DRuntime has not stable ABI between versions
2. DRuntime has not stable ABI between compilers
Anyone can shed light on why this is so? Is there just too much
evolution
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 05:45:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
1. DRuntime has not stable ABI between versions
2. DRuntime has not stable ABI between compilers
Anyone can shed light on why this is so? Is there just too much
evolution at the moment that the ABI needs to be constantly
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 09:27:25 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
[...]
Can you please elaborate on this? Which design choice and why?
Please read this:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/oetnnywqhcedrnvxu...@forum.dlang.org
http://www.infognition.com/blog/2014/the_real_problem_with_gc_in_d.html
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 05:45:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 16:43:21 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner [...]
This doesn't mean I'm happy with druntime and phobos, though.
Yep. Additions to std.range like orElse will make idiomatic
Phobos code slower then C++ and Scala.
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 05:45:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 16:43:21 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner
wrote:
Please don't throw all "old D users" in the same category,
generalizations like that only alienate. On a related note:
What I believe in is that D's community
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 08:49:33 UTC, Arun Chandrasekaran
wrote:
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 05:45:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Why without DRuntime? I had explained this multiple times.
Could this be captured in a wiki or somewhere in a more
positive tone so that new comers are not
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 at 05:45:19 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
Why without DRuntime? I had explained this multiple times.
Could this be captured in a wiki or somewhere in a more positive
tone so that new comers are not scared by the first look of it?
because D design GC will always will
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 16:43:21 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 15:35:13 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
[...]
my 1 cent: we should stop trying to convert C++ users.
Please, do no push devs to do not do something. There are two
directions: betterC and DRuntime.
On 03/04/2017 11:03 AM, Gerald wrote:
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa)
wrote:
Just a thought.
Maybe it's just me and this isn't to pick on you specifically, but I'm
getting tired of all of these threads where people tout various
ideas/actions as a way to
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 16:03:46 UTC, Gerald wrote:
Maybe it's just me and this isn't to pick on you specifically,
but I'm getting tired of all of these threads where people tout
various ideas/actions as a way to improve D, make it more
popular, cure cancer, solve world hunger, etc with
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 15:35:13 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
[...]
my 1 cent: we should stop trying to convert C++ users.
Please, do no push devs to do not do something. There are two
directions: betterC and DRuntime.
I've tried to follow the "betterC" discussion, but so far a
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential,
fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to
maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the
potential payout is improving a
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 13:24:25 UTC, ketmar wrote:
Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential,
fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to
maintaining it. Obviously a bit of
Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential, fork it,
and port it to D. And make a real commitment to maintaining it.
Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the potential payout is
improving
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential,
fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to
maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit,
On 03/04/2017 02:29 AM, Joakim wrote:
I recently ported this small C++/OpenGL ES 2.0 Android app to D, just
finished fixing the last bug I know of:
[...]
Obviously not a bigger project like you had in mind, but just thought
I'd mention this one.
Actually, that's very cool, particularly since
On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential,
fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to
maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit,
Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential, fork it,
and port it to D. And make a real commitment to maintaining it.
Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the potential payout is
improving a worthwhile tool's maintainability
25 matches
Mail list logo