On 09/15/2018 04:29 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Adding any sort of Concepts feature to D
would be very much at odds with DbI.
I'm not very familiar with C++'s attempted approaches to concepts, so
maybe we're thinking of two different things by "concepts", but I don't
see why it would be at
On Saturday, September 15, 2018 9:31:00 AM MDT Steven Schveighoffer via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 9/13/18 3:53 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 06:32:54PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >> On 09/11/2018 09:06 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> >>>
On 9/15/18 12:04 PM, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
On Saturday, 15 September 2018 at 15:31:00 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
The problem I had was that it wasn't clear to me which constraint was
failing. My bias brought me to "it must be autodecoding again!". But
objectively, I should have examined
On Saturday, 15 September 2018 at 15:31:00 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
The problem I had was that it wasn't clear to me which
constraint was failing. My bias brought me to "it must be
autodecoding again!". But objectively, I should have examined
all the constraints to see what was wrong.
On 9/13/18 3:53 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 06:32:54PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 09/11/2018 09:06 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Then I found the true culprit was isForwardRange!R. This led me to
requestion my sanity, and finally
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 06:32:54PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 09/11/2018 09:06 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> >
> > Then I found the true culprit was isForwardRange!R. This led me to
> > requestion my sanity, and finally realized I forgot the empty
> >
On 09/11/2018 09:06 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Then I found the true culprit was isForwardRange!R. This led me to
requestion my sanity, and finally realized I forgot the empty function.
This is one reason template-based interfaces like ranges should be
required to declare themselves as
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 12:45:15 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
Overloads:
[snip]
Good point.
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 14:58:21 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
Is there any reason why this is not sufficient?
[1] https://run.dlang.io/is/lu6nQ0
Overloads:
https://run.dlang.io/is/m5HGOh
The static asserts being in the constraint affects the template
candidacy viability. Being in the
On 9/11/18 7:58 AM, jmh530 wrote:
Is there any reason why this is not sufficient?
[1] https://run.dlang.io/is/lu6nQ0
That's OK if you are the only one defining S. But what if float is
handled elsewhere?
-Steve
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 02:00:29 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
[snip]
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/pull/131 will help narrow down
the cause.
I like it, but I worry people would find multiple ifs confusing.
The first line of the comment is about using static asserts and
in
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 13:08:46 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/10/18 7:00 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 20:44:46 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/10/18 12:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/10/18 8:58 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'll
On 9/10/18 7:00 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 20:44:46 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/10/18 12:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/10/18 8:58 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'll have to figure out why my specialized range doesn't allow
splitting based
On 9/10/18 1:44 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/10/18 12:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/10/18 8:58 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'll have to figure out why my specialized range doesn't allow
splitting based on " ".
And the answer is: I'm an idiot. Forgot to define empty :)
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 20:44:46 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 9/10/18 12:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/10/18 8:58 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'll have to figure out why my specialized range doesn't
allow splitting based on " ".
And the answer is: I'm an idiot.
On 9/10/18 12:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/10/18 8:58 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'll have to figure out why my specialized range doesn't allow
splitting based on " ".
And the answer is: I'm an idiot. Forgot to define empty :) Also my
slicing operator accepted ints and not
On 9/10/18 8:58 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'll have to figure out why my specialized range doesn't allow splitting
based on " ".
And the answer is: I'm an idiot. Forgot to define empty :) Also my
slicing operator accepted ints and not size_t.
-Steve
On 9/8/18 8:36 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 8/9/18 2:44 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/8/2018 2:01 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Here's where I'm struggling -- because a string provides indexing,
slicing, length, etc. but Phobos ignores that. I can't make a new
type that does the same
On 9/8/18 8:36 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'll work on adding some issues to the tracker, and potentially doing
some PRs so they can be fixed.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19238
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/6700
-Steve
On 9/10/18 1:45 AM, Chris wrote:
After a while your code will be cluttered with absurd stuff like this.
`.byCodeUnit`, `.byGrapheme`, `.array` etc. Due to my experience with
`splitter` et. al. I tried to create my own parser to have better
control over every step.
I considered that, but I'm
On Monday, September 10, 2018 2:45:27 AM MDT Chris via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> After a while your code will be cluttered with absurd stuff like
> this. `.byCodeUnit`, `.byGrapheme`, `.array` etc. Due to my
> experience with `splitter` et. al. I tried to create my own
> parser to have better
On Saturday, 8 September 2018 at 15:36:25 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 8/9/18 2:44 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
So it turns out that technically the problem here, even though
it seemed like an autodecoding problem, is a problem with
splitter.
splitter doesn't deal with encodings of
On Saturday, September 8, 2018 9:36:25 AM MDT Steven Schveighoffer via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 8/9/18 2:44 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
> > On 8/8/2018 2:01 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> >> Here's where I'm struggling -- because a string provides indexing,
> >> slicing, length, etc. but Phobos
On Saturday, 8 September 2018 at 15:36:25 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 8/9/18 2:44 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/8/2018 2:01 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Here's where I'm struggling -- because a string provides
indexing, slicing, length, etc. but Phobos ignores that. I
can't make a
On 8/9/18 2:44 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/8/2018 2:01 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Here's where I'm struggling -- because a string provides indexing,
slicing, length, etc. but Phobos ignores that. I can't make a new type
that does the same thing. Not only that, but I'm finding the
On 9/8/18 8:36 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Sent this when I was on a plane, and for some reason it posted with the
timestamp when I hit "send later", not when I connected just now. So
this is to bring the previous message back to the forefront.
-Steve
On Wednesday, 8 August 2018 at 21:01:18 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Not trying to give too much away about the library I'm writing,
but the problem I'm trying to solve is parsing out tokens from
a buffer. I want to delineate the whole, as well as the parts,
but it's difficult to get back
On 8/8/2018 2:01 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Here's where I'm struggling -- because a string provides indexing, slicing,
length, etc. but Phobos ignores that. I can't make a new type that does the same
thing. Not only that, but I'm finding the specializations of algorithms only
work on the
On 8/8/18 4:13 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/6/2018 6:57 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
But I'm not sure if the performance is going to be the same, since now
it will likely FORCE autodecoding on the algorithms that have
specialized versions to AVOID autodecoding (I think).
Autodecoding is
On 8/6/2018 6:57 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
But I'm not sure if the performance is going to be the
same, since now it will likely FORCE autodecoding on the algorithms that have
specialized versions to AVOID autodecoding (I think).
Autodecoding is expensive which is why the algorithms
On Monday, 6 August 2018 at 13:57:10 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
I'm very tempted to start writing my own parsing utilities and
avoid using Phobos algorithms...
-Steve
Oh yes; the good old autodecoding.
31 matches
Mail list logo
