On 10/20/16 5:07 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
I think I'm going to try to put out first-try pass at a new API in a
separate branch, try to get that out as soon as I can, and post it for
experimentation/feedback.
Awesome! Looking forward to it.
-Steve
On 10/20/2016 04:32 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 10/20/16 12:50 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
You can't bind individual values? Is there something wrong with
"bindParameter(value, paramIndex)"? (I mean, besides the fact that it
takes a ref, and, like the rest of the lib, isn't really
On 10/20/16 12:50 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 10/20/2016 09:33 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Yes, it does work. However, one thing that I *sorely* miss is the
ability to simply bind an individual value.
At the moment, in order to bind a value, you have to pass an array of
Variant for all
On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 15:18:36 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
[...]
On the one hand some people want rvalues to bind to const ref.
I can only assume that they want this because they want to pass
rvalues to a function efficiently
[...]
struct Vector { float x, y, z; }
In games/real-time
On 10/20/2016 09:33 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Yes, it does work. However, one thing that I *sorely* miss is the
ability to simply bind an individual value.
At the moment, in order to bind a value, you have to pass an array of
Variant for all the values. I currently have a whole wrapper
On 20 October 2016 at 21:07, Ethan Watson via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, 20 October 2016 at 10:36:16 UTC, Manu wrote:
>
>> DIP25 introduced return ref to address this issue. Just annotate it
>> correctly?
>>
>
> I mean, it'll work, but it's not the most
On 10/20/16 2:38 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 10/19/2016 07:04 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Right. For instance, binding query parameters with mysql-native. The
thing you're binding is passed by reference and I'm not sure why.
It's been like that since mysql-native's original release, by the
On Thursday, 20 October 2016 at 10:36:16 UTC, Manu wrote:
DIP25 introduced return ref to address this issue. Just
annotate it correctly?
I mean, it'll work, but it's not the most secure method to rely
on the programmer remembering to do it.
On 20 October 2016 at 20:16, Ethan Watson via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 21:19:03 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 15:58:23 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
>>
>>> So it seems like the compiler could take care of
On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 21:19:03 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 15:58:23 UTC, Chris Wright
wrote:
So it seems like the compiler could take care of this by only
providing lvalue references but automatically creating those
temporary variables for me. It's going
On 10/19/2016 07:04 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Right. For instance, binding query parameters with mysql-native. The
thing you're binding is passed by reference and I'm not sure why.
It's been like that since mysql-native's original release, by the
original author, some years ago.
I suspect
On 10/19/2016 10:53 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> [C++] just simply wants to *be*
> D, takes a couple drunken steps in that direction, and falls flat on its
> face.
That's too funny! :D
Ali
On 10/19/2016 04:50 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
My off-topic contribution to this thread: I won't be surprised when C++
will eventually be classified as a case of mass hysteria.
That'll happen at the same time modern web technology stacks are
classified similarly.
Much as I'd love to see that
On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 21:19:03 +, Atila Neves wrote:
> On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 15:58:23 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 15:18:36 +, Atila Neves wrote:
>>
>>> The situation is this: if one wants move semantics, one must know when
>>> one can move. Because rvalues
On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 15:58:23 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 15:18:36 +, Atila Neves wrote:
The situation is this: if one wants move semantics, one must
know when one can move. Because rvalues bind to const& in C++,
you never know whether the const& is an lvalue
On 10/19/2016 08:18 AM, Atila Neves wrote:
> Did you know there's more
> than one kind of rvalue in C++? Oh yes:
>
> http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/value_category
>
> Do we want that?
NO!
My off-topic contribution to this thread: I won't be surprised when C++
will eventually be
On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 15:18:36 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
My question is: do you _really_ need rvalues to bind to const
ref for performance? If not, what _do_ you need it for? Is it
an instinctive reaction against passing structs by value from
C++98 days?
imho it's the compiler job
On Wednesday, 19 October 2016 at 15:18:36 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
Yes, it's a stupid example. But ldc2 -O3 gives me this for
`silly`:
Great example, thanks, please more of that :)
https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/1842
cheers,
Johan
On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 15:18:36 +, Atila Neves wrote:
> The situation is this: if one wants move semantics, one must know when
> one can move. Because rvalues bind to const& in C++, you never know
> whether the const& is an lvalue or rvalue.
To clarify:
You copy lvalues instead of moving them.
19 matches
Mail list logo
