On 2014-09-24 08:57, Walter Bright wrote:
Heck, the dmd release package build scripts break every single release
cycle.
The it's obviously doing something wrong.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:37:59PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/23/2014 10:10 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Yeah, I wish that at least *some* attention would be paid to refining
existing features so that problematic corner cases could be ironed
out.
It's
On 9/24/2014 11:42 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2014-09-24 08:57, Walter Bright wrote:
Heck, the dmd release package build scripts break every single release
cycle.
The it's obviously doing something wrong.
See my reply to Vladimir.
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 08:53:51 UTC, user wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 06:28:21 UTC, Manu via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 20 September 2014 22:39, Tofu Ninja via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
i couldn't agree more. i would like to add, that coming from
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 03:16:58AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/24/2014 2:56 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 06:57:14 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/23/2014 11:24 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 24/09/14 06:31, Walter Bright wrote:
But it
On 2014-09-24 12:16, Walter Bright wrote:
I've never heard of a non-trivial project that didn't have constant
breakage of its build system. All kinds of reasons - add a file, forget
to add it to the manifest. Change the file contents, neglect to update
dependencies. Add new dependencies on some
On 9/24/14, 12:20 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 03:16:58AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/24/2014 2:56 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 06:57:14 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/23/2014 11:24 PM, Jacob
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:30:23PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/24/14, 12:20 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 03:16:58AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[...]
Building of the compiler/library itself is stable because
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 19:26:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2014-09-24 12:16, Walter Bright wrote:
I've never heard of a non-trivial project that didn't have
constant
breakage of its build system. All kinds of reasons - add a
file, forget
to add it to the manifest. Change the
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 18:46:29 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:37:59PM -0700, Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/23/2014 10:10 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Yeah, I wish that at least *some* attention would be paid to
refining
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 07:36:05PM +, Cliff via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 19:26:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2014-09-24 12:16, Walter Bright wrote:
I've never heard of a non-trivial project that didn't have constant
breakage of its build system. All
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 20:12:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 07:36:05PM +, Cliff via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 19:26:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2014-09-24 12:16, Walter Bright wrote:
I've never heard of a
On 9/24/14, 1:10 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
That's unfortunate indeed. I wish I could inspire them as to how cool a
properly-done build system can be.
[snip]
That's all nice. However: (1) the truth is there's no clear modern build
tool that has won over make; oh there's plenty of
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:16:23 +
Paolo Invernizzi via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
This is starting to be a little offensive...
sorry, i don't meant to. excuse me if i'm getting rude and iffensive.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 9/24/14, 2:14 PM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:16:23 +
Paolo Invernizzi via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
This is starting to be a little offensive...
sorry, i don't meant to. excuse me if i'm getting rude and iffensive.
Much appreciated.
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 07:44:38 -0700
Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com
wrote:
Your guidance of my career is uncalled for.
excuse me, i'm not trying to tell you what to do. neither i was trying
to say that you are forced to work on the features you don't want. same
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:10:46 -0700
H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
The problem is that still too many people think make
whenever they hear build system. Make is but a poor, antiquated
caricature of what modern build systems can do. Worse is that most
people
On 24 September 2014 17:43, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 9/23/2014 11:28 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
1. Constant rejection of improvements because OMG breaking change!.
Meanwhile, D has been breaking my code on practically every release
for
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 14:56:10 +
Don via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Most D code is yet to be written.
and it will be wrtitten in a language with heavy legacy. it's the same
thing as with c++ interop: pleasing imaginary future users at the
expense for current users. even
On 25 September 2014 00:56, Don via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 07:43:49 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/23/2014 11:28 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
1. Constant rejection of improvements because OMG breaking change!.
Meanwhile, D has
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 20:12:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 07:36:05PM +, Cliff via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 19:26:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2014-09-24 12:16, Walter Bright wrote:
I've never heard of a
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 21:53:34 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 14:56:10 +
Don via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
almost immediately: it's not hard to type that '@',
Actually, on the French keyboard, it is. The '\' too.
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 21:12:15 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/24/14, 1:10 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
That's unfortunate indeed. I wish I could inspire them as to
how cool a
properly-done build system can be.
[snip]
That's all nice. However: (1) the truth is
H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote in message
news:mailman.1573.1411584389.5783.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
I am, as you yourself point out later. But it's frustrating when pull
requests sit in the queue for weeks (sometimes months, or, in the case
of dmd pulls, *years*) without any
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 21:59:08 +
eles via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
almost immediately: it's not hard to type that '@',
Actually, on the French keyboard, it is. The '\' too.
and i'm for adding more @... sorry to all French people. ;-)
signature.asc
Description: PGP
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 08:20:32AM +1000, Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d wrote:
H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote in message
news:mailman.1573.1411584389.5783.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
I am, as you yourself point out later. But it's frustrating when pull
requests sit in the queue for
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:18:29PM +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
If I were to write a build system today that had to spell out all of
its commands, I'd go with tup or Ninja. That CMake has support for
Ninja is the icing on the cake for me. I wrote a Ninja build system
H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote in message
news:mailman.1605.1411597973.5783.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
IMNSHO, any PR that haven't been touched in more than, say, 1-2 months,
should just be outright closed. If/when the people involved have time to
work on it again, it can be reopened.
On 9/24/14, 3:18 PM, Atila Neves wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 21:12:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/24/14, 1:10 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
That's unfortunate indeed. I wish I could inspire them as to how cool a
properly-done build system can be.
[snip]
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 22:49:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:18:29PM +, Atila Neves via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
If I were to write a build system today that had to spell out
all of
its commands, I'd go with tup or Ninja. That CMake has
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:02:51PM +, Cliff via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 22:49:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:18:29PM +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[...]
If I were to write a build system today that had
On 9/24/14, 3:47 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
I've been thinking of that too! I have in mind a hybrid between tup and
SCons, integrating the best ideas of both and discarding the bad parts.
For example, SCons is notoriously bad at scalability: the need to scan
huge directory
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 19:38:44 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Wasn't Nick Sabalausky working on an automated (or automatable)
packaging script some time ago? Whatever happened with that?
I think that's the one that keeps breaking.
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 04:16:20PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/24/14, 3:47 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
I've been thinking of that too! I have in mind a hybrid between tup
and SCons, integrating the best ideas of both and discarding the bad
parts.
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 23:20:00 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:02:51PM +, Cliff via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 22:49:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:18:29PM +, Atila
On 9/24/14, 4:48 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
You're misrepresenting my position.*In spite of their current flaws*,
modern build systems like SCons and Tup already far exceed make in their
basic capabilities and reliability.
Fair enough, thanks. Anyhow the point is, to paraphrase
On 9/24/2014 7:56 AM, Don wrote:
For example: We agreed *years* ago to remove the NCEG operators. Why haven't
they been removed yet?
They do generate a warning if compiled with -w.
What change in particular?
I've got a nasty feeling that you misread what he wrote. Every time we say,
On 9/24/2014 2:44 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
The fact there's only 23 doesn't really mean anything, they're all
major usability problems.
I feel like I'm back in the early 90's when trying to iterate on my D code.
These issues have proven to be the most likely to send my professional
On 9/24/2014 12:26 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2014-09-24 12:16, Walter Bright wrote:
I've never heard of a non-trivial project that didn't have constant
breakage of its build system. All kinds of reasons - add a file, forget
to add it to the manifest. Change the file contents, neglect to
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:37:37PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/24/14, 4:48 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
You're misrepresenting my position.*In spite of their current flaws*,
modern build systems like SCons and Tup already far exceed make in
their basic
On 9/24/14, 6:54 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:37:37PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/24/14, 4:48 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
You're misrepresenting my position.*In spite of their current flaws*,
modern build systems
On 9/24/2014 11:44 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
No, I just named it as a representative case of many such wrinkles
within existing language features. The fact of the matter is, wherever
you turn, there's always something else that hasn't been fully ironed
out yet. Features that
On 25 September 2014 11:01, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 9/24/2014 2:44 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
The fact there's only 23 doesn't really mean anything, they're all
major usability problems.
I feel like I'm back in the early 90's when trying to
On 9/24/2014 7:50 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
I'm sorry, but this is awfully vague and contains nothing actionable.
The action I'd love to see would be Yes, debugging is important, we
should add it at a high priority on the roadmap and encourage the
language community to work with the
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 07:05:32PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/24/14, 6:54 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:37:37PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/24/14, 4:48 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/24/14, 9:15 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 07:05:32PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/24/14, 6:54 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:37:37PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On
On 9/24/14, 9:15 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 07:05:32PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/24/14, 6:54 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:37:37PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 08:55:23PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/24/2014 7:50 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
I'm sorry, but this is awfully vague and contains nothing
actionable.
The action I'd love to see would be Yes, debugging is important, we
should add it at a
On 9/24/2014 9:26 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The build system that will be successful for D will cooperate with the compiler,
which will give it fine-grained dependency information. Haskell does the same
with good results.
There's far more to a build system than generating executables. And
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 09:44:26PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/24/2014 9:26 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The build system that will be successful for D will cooperate with
the compiler, which will give it fine-grained dependency information.
Haskell does the same with
Actually you can't do this for D properly without enlisting the
help of the compiler. Scoped import is a very interesting
conditional dependency (it is realized only if the template is
instantiated).
Also, lazy opening of imports is almost guaranteed to have a
huge good impact on build
On 9/24/2014 10:08 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
If you like building real airplanes out of Lego pieces, be my guest. Me,
I prefer using more suitable tools. :-P
I spend very little time fussing with make. Making it work better (even to 0
cost) will add pretty much nothing to my
On 9/24/14, 10:14 PM, Cliff wrote:
This is one of my biggest frustrations with existing build systems -
which really are nothing more than glorified makes with some extra
syntax and - for the really advanced ones - ways to help you correctly
specify your makefiles by flagging errors or missing
On 9/24/2014 9:43 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
printf debugging FTW! :-P
There's more than that, but yeah. Most of my types I'll write a pretty printer
for, and use that. No conceivable debugger can guess how I want to view my data.
For example, I can pretty-print an Expression
The lack of clear direction or communication thereof. A
continual adding of new stuff to try and appease the theoretical
masses who will certainly come flocking to D if implemented, and
a lack of attention paid to tightening up what we've already got
and deprecating old stuff that no one
On 9/23/14, 7:29 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
The lack of clear direction or communication thereof.
* C++ compatibility
* Everything GC-related
Probably a distant third is improving build tooling. But those two are
more important that everything else by an order of magnitude.
Andrei
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 15:47:21 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/23/14, 7:29 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
The lack of clear direction or communication thereof.
* C++ compatibility
* Everything GC-related
Probably a distant third is improving build tooling. But those
two are more
On 9/23/14, 9:06 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 15:47:21 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/23/14, 7:29 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
The lack of clear direction or communication thereof.
* C++ compatibility
* Everything GC-related
Probably a distant third is improving
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 16:19:31 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/23/14, 9:06 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 15:47:21 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/23/14, 7:29 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
The lack of clear direction or communication thereof.
* C++
Andrei Alexandrescu:
* C++ compatibility
* Everything GC-related
Probably a distant third is improving build tooling. But those
two are more important that everything else by an order of
magnitude.
In parallel there are other things like ddmd, checked ints in
core library, perhaps to
On 9/23/14, 9:40 AM, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
I'm starting to think that there will be a lot of buzz and fuss about D
as soon as good bindings to popular C++ libs will appear in the wild...
Yah, and core.stdcpp will be quite the surprise. -- Andrei
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 16:50:26 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/23/14, 9:40 AM, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
I'm starting to think that there will be a lot of buzz and
fuss about D
as soon as good bindings to popular C++ libs will appear in
the wild...
Yah, and core.stdcpp will be
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 14:29:06 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
[…] and a lack of attention paid to tightening up what we've
already got and deprecating old stuff that no one wants any
more.
This. The hypocritical fear of making breaking changes (the fact
that not all of them are bad has
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:29:05 +
Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
function attributes. I'm sure someone likes them, but I'm
drowning in pure system const immutable @nogc @illegitemate @wtf
hell.
and 'const' is such overpowered that it's barely usable on
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:32:39 +
David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Seriously, once somebody comes up with an automatic fixup tool,
i bet nobody will. for many various reasons.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 9/23/14, 11:32 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 14:29:06 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
[…] and a lack of attention paid to tightening up what we've already
got and deprecating old stuff that no one wants any more.
This. The hypocritical fear of making breaking changes
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 18:38:08 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Well put. Again, the two things we need to work on are C++
compatibility and the GC. -- Andrei
Has much thought gone into how we'll address C++ const?
On 9/23/14, 12:01 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 18:38:08 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Well put. Again, the two things we need to work on are C++
compatibility and the GC. -- Andrei
Has much thought gone into how we'll address C++ const?
Some. A lot more needs
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 07:01:05PM +, Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 18:38:08 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Well put. Again, the two things we need to work on are C++
compatibility and the GC. -- Andrei
Has much thought gone into how we'll
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 19:10:07 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 07:01:05PM +, Sean Kelly via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 18:38:08 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Well put. Again, the two things we need to work on are C++
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 07:50:38PM +, Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 19:10:07 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 07:01:05PM +, Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[...]
Has much thought gone into how we'll address C++
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 20:22:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
SFINAE is another dark corner of disaster waiting to happen,
once we
decide to implement C++ template compatibility. As well as
Koenig
lookup, which will become indispensible if D code is to
actually use
On 9/23/14, 4:25 PM, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 20:22:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
SFINAE is another dark corner of disaster waiting to happen, once we
decide to implement C++ template compatibility. As well as Koenig
lookup, which will become indispensible
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:25:52PM +, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 20:22:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
SFINAE is another dark corner of disaster waiting to happen, once we
decide to implement C++ template compatibility. As well as Koenig
On 9/23/14, 5:06 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
You *will* need SFINAE if you expect to interface C++ template libraries
with D.
Nope. -- Andrei
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 00:08:19 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
You *will* need SFINAE if you expect to interface C++ template
libraries
with D. Imagine that an existing codebase is using some C++
template
library that depends on SFINAE. You'd like to start migrating
to D,
On 9/23/2014 7:29 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
The lack of clear direction or communication thereof. A continual adding of new
stuff to try and appease the theoretical masses who will certainly come flocking
to D if implemented, and a lack of attention paid to tightening up what we've
already got and
On 9/21/2014 3:16 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 08:49:38AM +, via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sunday, 21 September 2014 at 00:07:36 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 12:39:23 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
What do you think are the
On 9/22/2014 10:16 AM, luminousone wrote:
What is needed?
The people who maintain large projects need to try them out with the beta
compilers and file any regressions.
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 03:59:10 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
This is completely unworkable.
Mister, please stop hurting the pool straw man.
Let me quote the relevant part:
They don't necessarily need to be blocking, just a notice
hey, your PR broke this and that project would
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 04:00:06 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/22/2014 10:16 AM, luminousone wrote:
What is needed?
The people who maintain large projects need to try them out
with the beta compilers and file any regressions.
Question: What's the point of testing betas if the
On 9/23/2014 9:12 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 04:00:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/22/2014 10:16 AM, luminousone wrote:
What is needed?
The people who maintain large projects need to try them out with the beta
compilers and file any regressions.
On 9/23/2014 9:08 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 03:59:10 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
This is completely unworkable.
Mister, please stop hurting the pool straw man.
Let me quote the relevant part:
They don't necessarily need to be blocking, just a notice
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 03:44:52 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/23/2014 7:29 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
The lack of clear direction or communication thereof. A
continual adding of new
stuff to try and appease the theoretical masses who will
certainly come flocking
to D if implemented,
On 9/23/2014 9:46 PM, Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d wrote:
There's clearly been a lot of attention paid to bug fixes. But for the
rest... I feel like the overall direction is towards whatever is
currently thought to gain the most new users. The thing is that D has
already *got* me. What I want
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 04:46:00AM +, Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 03:44:52 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/23/2014 7:29 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
[...]
There's clearly been a lot of attention paid to bug fixes. But for
the rest... I feel like the
On 9/23/2014 10:10 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Yeah, I wish that at least *some* attention would be paid to refining
existing features so that problematic corner cases could be ironed out.
It's kinda maddening to hear statements like that. Just in 2.066:
103 compiler regressions
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 21:59:53 -0700
Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
I understand quite thoroughly why c++ support is a big win
i believe it's not.
so-called enterprise will not choose D for many reasons, and c++
interop is on the bottom of the list.
seasoned
On 9/23/14, 9:46 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
So in that respect I understand the push for C++ support because that's
the speed bump that Andrei has hit. But here's the thing... by pursuing
this we're effectively focusing all of our efforts *on another
language*. And we're doing so when D itself
On 21 September 2014 15:54, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 9/21/14, 1:27 AM, ponce wrote:
On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 12:39:23 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
What do you think are the worst parts of D?
Proper D code is supposed to have lots of
Timon Gehr wrote in message news:lvmh5b$eo9$1...@digitalmars.com...
When was int x(T)=2; introduced?
At the same time as enum x(T) = 2; I think.
Also, C-style array syntax would actually be string results(T)[] = ;.
Nah, array type suffix goes before the template argument list.
On 09/22/2014 03:26 PM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
Timon Gehr wrote in message news:lvmh5b$eo9$1...@digitalmars.com...
When was int x(T)=2; introduced?
At the same time as enum x(T) = 2; I think.
...
Is this documented?
Also, C-style array syntax would actually be string results(T)[] = ;.
On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 14:22:32 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 13:30:24 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 12:39:23 UTC, Tofu Ninja
wrote:
What do you think are the worst parts of D?
1. The whining in the forums.
2. Lacks
On Sunday, 21 September 2014 at 22:17:59 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 08:49:38AM +, via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Sunday, 21 September 2014 at 00:07:36 UTC, Vladimir
Panteleev wrote:
On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 12:39:23 UTC, Tofu Ninja
wrote:
What
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 14:28:47 +
AsmMan via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
It's really needed to keep C++-compatible as possible otherwise
too few people are going to use it. If C++ wasn't C-compatible do
you think it would be a successfully language it is today? I
On 9/22/14, 1:44 PM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 14:28:47 +
AsmMan via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
It's really needed to keep C++-compatible as possible otherwise
too few people are going to use it. If C++ wasn't C-compatible do
you think it
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:14:28 -0700
Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com
wrote:
D is not c++-compatible anyway.
D is ABI- and mangling-compatible with C++.
but we were talking about syntactic compatibility.
Well what can I say? I'm glad you're not making the
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 01:39:00 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:14:28 -0700
Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com
wrote:
D is not c++-compatible anyway.
D is ABI- and mangling-compatible with C++.
but we were talking about
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 04:38:51AM +0300, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:14:28 -0700
Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com
wrote:
D is not c++-compatible anyway.
D is ABI- and mangling-compatible with C++.
but we were talking about
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 19:16:27 -0700
H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
For a moment, I read that as you'll destroy any traces of C++, so the
first thing that would go is the DMD source code. :-P
but we have magicport! well, almost... i'll postpone c++ destruction
301 - 400 of 434 matches
Mail list logo
