On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 13:15:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
I just got word about Sparrow (from its creator no less):
presentation_offline_Sparrow.pdf - https://db.tt/m2WwpxIY
Speak.mp4 - https://db.tt/RDmrlEu7
ThesisLucTeo.pdf - https://db.tt/1ylGHuc1
An interesting language that
On 10.04.2016 13:00, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10.04.2016 12:01, Lucian Radu Teodorescu wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 21:42:31 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
The sum of squares of odd fibonacci numbers example is...
unconvincing. It is inefficient and incorrect.
How would you do it?
The Fibonacci
On 10.04.2016 12:01, Lucian Radu Teodorescu wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 21:42:31 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
The sum of squares of odd fibonacci numbers example is...
unconvincing. It is inefficient and incorrect.
How would you do it?
The Fibonacci example isn't very complex, but the idea
On Sunday, 10 April 2016 at 10:01:21 UTC, Lucian Radu Teodorescu
wrote:
I have a hard time imagining how an allocator would work on
these conditions. How does D implement the memory allocation at
compile-time?
It's actually a problem that CTFE interpreter allocates too much
and too often
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 21:42:31 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
The sum of squares of odd fibonacci numbers example is...
unconvincing. It is inefficient and incorrect.
How would you do it?
The Fibonacci example isn't very complex, but the idea was to go
from really-simple examples to more
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 20:42:27 UTC, Lucian Radu
Teodorescu wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 14:54:18 UTC, Puming wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 13:15:48 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
[...]
Interesting. I've thinking about concepts too. Hopefully they
could come into D.
On 04/06/2016 04:42 PM, Lucian Radu Teodorescu wrote:
In my opinion implementing concepts in terms of interfaces is more
restrictive than implementing them as boolean predicates.
[snip]
Implementing concepts as predicates, give you much more freedom. I would
argue that you can represent many
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 21:35:51 UTC, mate wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 20:48:20 UTC, Lucian Radu
Teodorescu wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 18:27:25 UTC, BLM768 wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 18:25:11 UTC, BLM768 wrote:
Aside from the explicit annotations, I don't
On 06.04.2016 15:15, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I just got word about Sparrow (from its creator no less):
presentation_offline_Sparrow.pdf - https://db.tt/m2WwpxIY
The sum of squares of odd fibonacci numbers example is... unconvincing.
It is inefficient and incorrect.
Speak.mp4 -
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 20:48:20 UTC, Lucian Radu
Teodorescu wrote:
Compared to CTFE, in Sparrow you can run at compile-time *any*
algorithm you like. No restrictions apply. Not only you can do
whatever your run-time code can do, but can also call external
programs at compile-time.
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 20:48:20 UTC, Lucian Radu
Teodorescu wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 18:27:25 UTC, BLM768 wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 18:25:11 UTC, BLM768 wrote:
Aside from the explicit annotations, I don't see how their
solution is more flexible than D's CTFE,
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 18:27:25 UTC, BLM768 wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 18:25:11 UTC, BLM768 wrote:
Aside from the explicit annotations, I don't see how their
solution is more flexible than D's CTFE, but I might be
missing something.
Never mind. Just saw their language
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 14:54:18 UTC, Puming wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 13:15:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
I just got word about Sparrow (from its creator no less):
presentation_offline_Sparrow.pdf - https://db.tt/m2WwpxIY
Speak.mp4 - https://db.tt/RDmrlEu7
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 18:25:11 UTC, BLM768 wrote:
Aside from the explicit annotations, I don't see how their
solution is more flexible than D's CTFE, but I might be missing
something.
Never mind. Just saw their language embedding example. Neat!
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 13:15:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On the plus side Sparrow has a smoother integration of
compile-time vs. run-time computation, which makes it a bit
easier to transition from one to another.
Aside from the explicit annotations, I don't see how their
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 16:56:17 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 13:15:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Anyway it's a new level of type system. Does D still accept new
features of such complexity?
D3?
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 13:15:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Another feature we could consider adding to D is a simple
definition of concepts as complex Boolean predicates. That's
essentially identical to isForwardRange etc. etc. but makes for
simpler use of these predicates.
On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 at 13:15:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
I just got word about Sparrow (from its creator no less):
presentation_offline_Sparrow.pdf - https://db.tt/m2WwpxIY
Speak.mp4 - https://db.tt/RDmrlEu7
ThesisLucTeo.pdf - https://db.tt/1ylGHuc1
An interesting language that
18 matches
Mail list logo
