On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 05:32:36 UTC, Carl Sturtivant wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 04:44:44 UTC, Carl Sturtivant wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 05:41:43 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 April 2017 at 18:34:48 UTC, Carl Sturtivant
wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 April 2017 at 15:00:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 22:43:56 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
You replied to the wrong person here, seeing as I did not link
to the article you're referring to,
Sorry...
so I'll reply:
Expanding the continuous memory region a dynamic array consists
of (possibly moving it) once it overfl
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 14:53:02 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
This year, DConf has an extra day tacked on for problem solving
in the form of a hackathon. The intent is to work on issues
people find frustrating in the D ecosystem. While there will be
time given at the event for proposals, and t
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 07:35:00 UTC, Ben wrote:
so I'll reply:
Expanding the continuous memory region a dynamic array
consists of (possibly moving it) once it overflows has
absolutely nothing to do with the GC, or even the language,
it's how the abstract data type "dynamic array" is defi
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 04:24:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 22:43:56 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner
wrote:
Working on the memory chunk layer is memory management.
Working on the object layer is object lifetime management.
D offers you both automatic memory management
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 08:25:01 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 04:24:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 22:43:56 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner
wrote:
Working on the memory chunk layer is memory management.
Working on the object layer is object
On Wednesday, 26 April 2017 at 11:26:19 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
I'm wondering if you actually wrote this? It seems to be quoted.
That was a quote from the DIP. (guess I should have used a colon)
On Thursday, 16 February 2017 at 21:05:51 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
After a little of exploration of the JIT, I have now determined
that a simple risc architecture is still the best.
(codegen for scaled loads is hard :p)
I am now back to fixing non-compiling code,
such as :
struct S
{
On 2017-04-28 04:12, Luís Marques wrote:
Backtraces with line information on macOS?
That would be nice. Should be fairly trivial to look at the Linux
implementation and to the same but read the data from different sections.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 07:35:00 UTC, Ben wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 22:43:56 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner
wrote:
D just does this transparently for you by default. If you
already know the exact or maximum size, you can allocate
*once* (not 6 times) using `new` and `.reserve` respectively
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 08:26:28 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 08:25:01 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 04:24:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 22:43:56 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner
wrote:
Working on the memory ch
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 09:02:19 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 08:26:28 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
If it isn't sound then it isn't worth mentioning...
So you claim...
Actually, unsound lifetime management is worse than nothing as
far as correctness goes...
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 09:12:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 09:02:19 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 08:26:28 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
If it isn't sound then it isn't worth mentioning...
So you claim...
Actually, unsound li
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 14:53:02 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
This year, DConf has an extra day tacked on for problem solving
in the form of a hackathon. The intent is to work on issues
people find frustrating in the D ecosystem. While there will be
time given at the event for proposals, and t
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 09:52:29 UTC, Petar Kirov
[ZombineDev] wrote:
AST introspection - given a function definition (!=
declaration, i.e. the body is available) f, the expression
__traits(ast, f) should return an instance of FuncDeclaration
(https://github.com/dlang/dmd/blob/197ff0fd84b
On 2017-04-27 19:06, Andre Pany wrote:
Another big issue for me is using dub in a company. Big companies do not
want to use the official dub repository due to security issues.
That would be nice.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 08:47:43 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
After a little of exploration of the JIT, I have now determined
that a simple risc architecture is still the best.
(codegen for scaled loads is hard :p)
Do you mean no Jit?
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 13:03:42 UTC, Nordlöw wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 08:47:43 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
After a little of exploration of the JIT, I have now
determined that a simple risc architecture is still the best.
(codegen for scaled loads is hard :p)
Do you mean no Jit?
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 12:29:48 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 4/24/17 1:43 AM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
"Dashing, awesome, ultra-attractive programmer with an
impeccably fine
taste in languages."
It's a bit long and doesn't include the letter D
FIFY
-Steve
D-veloper
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 10:09:32 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 09:52:29 UTC, Petar Kirov
[ZombineDev] wrote:
AST introspection - given a function definition (!=
declaration, i.e. the body is available) f, the expression
__traits(ast, f) should return an instance
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 13:19:47 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 12:29:48 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 4/24/17 1:43 AM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
"Dashing, awesome, ultra-attractive programmer with an
impeccably fine
taste in languages."
It's a bit long and
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 13:13:16 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
Do you mean no Jit?
Of course there will be a JIT.
Ah, I misunderstood you formulation.
But currently I am fixing busy bugs in the generated IR.
So the implementation of jit will have to wait a little.
Ok. Thanks.
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 09:40:07 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
I'm sorry, but that's just plain wrong. D does not have
ownership pointers because nobody that wants them has stepped
up and
1) Done the work of drafting an informal proposal that
*actually deals with _all_ of the issues involved*
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 09:01:03AM +, Moritz Maxeiner via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 07:35:00 UTC, Ben wrote:
[...]
> > Is it so hard for developers when you declare a variable, to later
> > also clean it up???
> >
> > var x = 1;
> > // Do work
> > x.free;
>
> If you
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 14:59:46 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 09:40:07 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
I'm sorry, but that's just plain wrong. D does not have
ownership pointers because nobody that wants them has stepped
up and
1) Done the work of drafting an info
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 13:31:33 UTC, Petar Kirov
[ZombineDev] wrote:
[...]
Other applications include:
* compiling/transpiling D functions to targets
like JS, SPIR-V, WebAssembly, etc. using CTFE.
* CTFE-driven code diagnostics (linting)
* Adding semantic to user defined attributes:
E.g.
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 15:23:18 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
you could save yourself the bug by writing:
auto x = malloc(...);
scope(exit) free(x);
// ... however many pages of stuff you want, you don't have to
// remember to write free() afterwards!
Yes, D comes
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 12:28:38 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
My solution would be to push the duplication onto the user. I'm
not a fan of implicit copying. It's also wasteful in the case
of immutable data.
Isn't that an odd stance given that "struct" is supposed to be a
value type?
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 16:03:18 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
I usually use the GC, so I have limited knowledge in this area.
How common is this pattern in D code? Is it better than using
reference counted structs? Is there any advantage to using the
GC in this scenario?
I would like to add th
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 01:12:39 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
On 04/27/2017 07:12 PM, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
Wasn't one major selling point of compile time introspection /
duck
typing that we could stop using interfaces such... naming
schemes?
Not that I speak for everyone, bu
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:06:51 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 16:03:18 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
I usually use the GC, so I have limited knowledge in this
area. How common is this pattern in D code? Is it better than
using reference counted structs? Is there any advantage to
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:42:18 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
I'm hoping to put all information in one place. Then when
someone on Reddit or HN or here starts making claims about the
GC, I can give them one link that shows all of their options.
That's nice. Just get your hopes up for it having an
On Thursday, 16 February 2017 at 21:05:51 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Hi Guys, I just implemented sliceAssigment.
meaning the following code will now compile:
uint[] assignSlice(uint from, uint to, uint[] stuff)
{
uint[] slice;
slice.length = to + 4;
foreach (uint i; 0 .. to +
On 04/28/2017 01:09 PM, Atila Neves wrote:
https://github.com/atilaneves/concepts
import concepts;
@models!(isForwardRange, MyType)
struct MyType { }
Hmm, close, but if I'm reading the source right, it looks like a type
doesn't have to use the UDA in order for isXXX or "static
assert
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:09:22 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
https://github.com/atilaneves/concepts
import concepts;
@models!(isForwardRange, MyType)
struct MyType { }
Atila
I remember you had posted about this last year. It looks like
you've added some stuff on ranges to it recently
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 04:03:18PM +, bachmeier via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 15:23:18 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>
> > you could save yourself the bug by writing:
> >
> > auto x = malloc(...);
> > scope(exit) free(x);
> > // ... however many pages of stuff yo
On 4/28/17 12:56 PM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 12:28:38 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
My solution would be to push the duplication onto the user. I'm not a
fan of implicit copying. It's also wasteful in the case of immutable
data.
Isn't that an odd stance give
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 18:05:41 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 4/28/17 12:56 PM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
Isn't that an odd stance given that "struct" is supposed to be
a value
type?
Not really, but thanks for asking.
Well, it counters the very definition of a value... I guess
There are three D modules that I could identify that provide Kafka
bindings[1] by searching for "kafka" on the code registry:
http://code.dlang.org/
Could people in the know please update the Kafka site with necessary
information like what version of Kafka they support, etc.
Thank you,
Ali
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:53:04 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Thursday, 16 February 2017 at 21:05:51 UTC, Stefan Koch
wrote:
[ ... ]
Hi Guys, I just implemented sliceAssigment.
meaning the following code will now compile:
uint[] assignSlice(uint from, uint to, uint[] stuff)
{
uint[] sl
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 15:43:22 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 14:59:46 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
Walter's position has always been that having more than a
single pointer type is a disaster.
None of the threads I've read in the last couple of years
regardin
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:48:47 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:42:18 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
I'm hoping to put all information in one place. Then when
someone on Reddit or HN or here starts making claims about the
GC, I can give them one link that shows all of
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 19:41:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 15:43:22 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 14:59:46 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
Walter's position has always been that having more than a
single pointer type is a disaster.
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 20:13:58 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
Both of these, however, show only that he doesn't seem to
personally like multiple pointer types (and consequently
doesn't seem to have any interest in working on them himself);
that's not the same as him claiming that it "is a di
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 20:21:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 20:13:58 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
Both of these, however, show only that he doesn't seem to
personally like multiple pointer types (and consequently
doesn't seem to have any interest in working o
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 20:21:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 20:13:58 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
Both of these, however, show only that he doesn't seem to
personally like multiple pointer types (and consequently
doesn't seem to have any interest in working o
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 19:41:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 19:41:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
«Back in the old DOS days, there were multiple pointer types
(near and far). Programmers put up with that because it was the
only way, but they HATED HATED H
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 09:50:49PM +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 19:41:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> > On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 19:41:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> > «Back in the old DOS days, there were multiple pointer types (near
> > a
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 18:04:06 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:09:22 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
https://github.com/atilaneves/concepts
import concepts;
@models!(isForwardRange, MyType)
struct MyType { }
Atila
I remember you had posted about this last year. It loo
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 21:21:13 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
To be fair, C++ effectively has multiple pointer types too with
raw pointers, unique_ptr, shared_ptr, and weak_ptr. However,
each of the extra ones has a unique purpose and are opt-in. As
a result, people happily use them when it makes the
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 13:31:33 UTC, Petar Kirov
[ZombineDev] wrote:
Other applications include:
* compiling/transpiling D functions to targets
like JS, SPIR-V,
I got you covered ;)
(LDC not CTFE though. It would be fiendishly complicated to do at
CTFE as a fair amount of compiler magic i
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 14:53:02 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
This year, DConf has an extra day tacked on for problem solving
in the form of a hackathon. The intent is to work on issues
people find frustrating in the D ecosystem. While there will be
time given at the event for proposals, and t
52 matches
Mail list logo