On Wednesday, 11 October 2017 at 07:39:47 UTC, Tourist wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
Hi Guys,
At the end of July newCTFE became capable of executing the
bf-ctfe[1] code and pass the tests.
At 5 times the speed. While using 40% the memory.
(It should be
On Wednesday, 11 October 2017 at 10:45:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Wednesday, 11 October 2017 at 07:39:47 UTC, Tourist wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[...]
What about October 2017? I miss your frequent updates on
newCTFE.
Sorry about that, I am
On Wednesday, 11 October 2017 at 07:39:47 UTC, Tourist wrote:
What about October 2017? I miss your frequent updates on
newCTFE.
Me too.
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
Hi Guys,
At the end of July newCTFE became capable of executing the
bf-ctfe[1] code and pass the tests.
At 5 times the speed. While using 40% the memory.
(It should be noted that the code generated by bf-ctfe is
optimized to put
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Hi Guys,
many stabilty fixed have happened and as a result the new
preview-build is green on the auto-tester and project tester.
However it might still produce !!invalid code!! if a certain
combination of features
On Monday, 14 August 2017 at 11:25:14 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
Release is coming closer!
Nice, keep up the good work.
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 01:54:26PM +, Per Nordlöw via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Monday, 14 August 2017 at 11:25:14 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
> > > [ ... ]
> >
> > Guys,
> >
> > newCTFE is green on 64 and 32bit!
> >
> > I've
On Monday, 14 August 2017 at 11:25:14 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Guys,
newCTFE is green on 64 and 32bit!
I've finally fixed || and &&.
For good!
whoho ;)
Release is coming closer!
Wow, I can't wait!
On Monday, 14 August 2017 at 11:25:14 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Guys,
newCTFE is green on 64 and 32bit!
I've finally fixed || and &&.
For good!
whoho ;)
Release is coming closer!
There are times I wish the D
On Monday, 14 August 2017 at 11:25:14 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
Guys,
newCTFE is green on 64 and 32bit!
I've finally fixed || and &&.
For good!
whoho ;)
Release is coming closer!
Cool.
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Guys,
newCTFE is green on 64 and 32bit!
I've finally fixed || and &&.
For good!
whoho ;)
Release is coming closer!
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Hi there,
I've just adjusted the memory allocation behavior.
newCTFE will now start-out allocating 32M of memory at startup.
and increase the allocated space in 8x steps if it hits the limit
while executing concat code.
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Hi Guys,
I've fixed a few ABI bugs and as a result my alternative to
std.bitmanip.bitfields complies now.
I've also made an intrinsic for the concat operation.
Which causes ~= to be 6-10x faster when it's heavily used.
On Friday, 11 August 2017 at 20:13:04 UTC, Dominikus Dittes
Scherkl wrote:
On Friday, 11 August 2017 at 09:27:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Hey guys,
I just finished &&.
Hooray!
So what's still missing? Or is this now
On Friday, 11 August 2017 at 09:27:47 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Hey guys,
I just finished &&.
Hooray!
So what's still missing? Or is this now complete enough to
release?
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Hey guys,
I just finished &&.
The following test works now:
int[2] aaa2(bool b1, bool b2, bool b3, bool b4)
{
int x = 0;
if (b1 && ++x && b2 && x++ && b3 && (b4 || x++))
{
return [x, 1];
}
else
{
On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 20:58:34 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 18:27:37 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 15:47:09 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[...]
You mention something about the CTFE extensions, can you give
us an example/link of this
On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 18:27:37 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 15:47:09 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[...]
After a bit of fixing and the unfortunate addition of 4
blacklisted functions, phobos complies
On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 15:47:09 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[...]
After a bit of fixing and the unfortunate addition of 4
blacklisted functions, phobos complies and passes the unittests
under newCTFE. (Which implies that
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
After a bit of fixing and the unfortunate addition of 4
blacklisted functions, phobos complies and passes the unittests
under newCTFE. (Which implies that druntime compiles and works as
well)
A few ABI issues were
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
I am quite surprised.
newCTFE comes far enough now, that it tries to interpret it's own
interpreter (which is CTFEable)
Of course it fails in doing so since we do not yet handle newing
arrays or associative arrays.
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
The following code does now compile with newCTFE,
and it's a little faster then the old interpreter.
Not much though since that is not a pathological case.
pure nothrow @nogc @safe uint[256][8] genTables32(uint
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
After a surprisingly small amount of work we are now supporting
pointers to array-items.
It should be quite doable to add bounds-checked pointer with
minimal amount of work.
(Note this is only for 1D arrays/Slices ...
On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 at 21:27:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
Sadly I temporarily broke the support for string-members in
structs.
Fixed now.
The issue was ABI related.
we used to store pointers to sliceDescriptors, but I changed that
to store the sliceDescriptors directly. Because otherwise
24 matches
Mail list logo
