Re: Analysis of D GC

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 23:39:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:50:05PM +, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d wrote: What is it about Windows that makes you call it a distant possibility? Is it just that you are unfamiliar with it or is there some specific OS level

Re: dmd -betterC

On Tuesday, 20 June 2017 at 01:51:26 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Is getting a whole lot better: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6918 You can now build D executables that do not link in anything from Phobos - only from the standard C library. Thanks!

Re: GDC generate wrong .exe ("not a valid win32 application")

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:08:56 +, Patric Dexheimer wrote: > Fresh install of GDC. (tried with 32x ad 32_64x) > > GDC: 6.3.0 DUB: 1.3.0 > > dub run --build=release --arch=x86 --compiler=gdc > > (...) > Running .\main Failed to spawn new process (%1 is not a valid win32 > application) If you

dmd -betterC

Is getting a whole lot better: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6918 You can now build D executables that do not link in anything from Phobos - only from the standard C library.

Re: dmd -betterC

On Tuesday, 20 June 2017 at 01:51:26 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Is getting a whole lot better: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6918 You can now build D executables that do not link in anything from Phobos - only from the standard C library. To be fair, this is not new, just more convenient

Re: dmd -betterC

On Tuesday, 20 June 2017 at 01:51:26 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Is getting a whole lot better: It looks to me that this patch does two things: 1) -betterC now implies -defaultlib= 2) -betterC omits the call to _d_dso_registry And I see a previous patch is also in there that uses C's

Re: dmd -betterC

On 6/19/2017 7:55 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: To all, I'd hold off on posting this to external forums until more of the open bugzilla issues are changed (I saw Walter tagging them earlier today, so I know they are on his radar).

Re: dmd -betterC

On 6/19/2017 6:53 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: To be fair, this is not new, just more convenient :) http://forum.dlang.org/post/qcbicxrtmjmwiljsy...@forum.dlang.org Convenience is everything!

Re: Analysis of D GC

safety0ff wrote: On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 23:39:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:50:05PM +, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d wrote: What is it about Windows that makes you call it a distant possibility? Is it just that you are unfamiliar with it or is there some

Re: Analysis of D GC

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 22:35:42 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: My take on D's GC problem, also spoiler - I'm going to build a new one soonish. http://olshansky.me/gc/runtime/dlang/2017/06/14/inside-d-gc.html --- Dmitry Olshansky if not a single pool is capable to service an allocation a

Re: libc dependency

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 21:01:35 UTC, Honey wrote: On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 20:26:43 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 20:20:23 UTC, Honey wrote: Is it correct that D produces executables that depend on libc? Usually yes, since that makes sense for most programs on

Re: libc dependency

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 07:29:46PM -0400, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: > On 6/19/17 5:45 PM, Moritz Maxeiner wrote: > > On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 21:35:56 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > > > IIRC, Tango did not depend on libc at all. It only used system > > > calls. So

Re: dmd -betterC

On Tuesday, 20 June 2017 at 03:54:13 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Which issue is that? There isn't a specific bugzilla entry, but the very first one on your list mentions it: https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11881 and it is caused by typeinfo:

Re: Analysis of D GC

H. S. Teoh wrote: He mentioned the "fork trick", which I assume refers to how Linux's implementation of fork() uses copy-on-write rather than immediately duplicating the parent process' memory structures. There was a D1 GC some time ago that depended on this behaviour to speed up the

Re: dmd -betterC

On 6/19/2017 9:08 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Tuesday, 20 June 2017 at 03:54:13 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Which issue is that? There isn't a specific bugzilla entry, but the very first one on your list mentions it: https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11881 There's a lot mentioned

Re: Visual D no bp's on x64

On Sunday, 18 June 2017 at 21:02:12 UTC, Rainer Schuetze wrote: On 18.06.2017 20:25, Mike B Johnson wrote: Didn't work ;/ All I get on the output wndow is " C:\Windows\System32\dbghelp.dll unloaded. The thread 0x1ea4 has exited with code -1 (0x). The thread 0x1390 has exited with

Re: GDC generate wrong .exe ("not a valid win32 application")

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 23:55:54 UTC, rjframe wrote: On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:08:56 +, Patric Dexheimer wrote: Fresh install of GDC. (tried with 32x ad 32_64x) GDC: 6.3.0 DUB: 1.3.0 dub run --build=release --arch=x86 --compiler=gdc (...) Running .\main Failed to spawn new process (%1

Re: libc dependency

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 23:29:46 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: I don't know what's involved in creating those wrappers, but I can't imagine it's difficult to do with D (it's probably actually easier than in C/assembly). Not difficult, but a tedious amount of work for no inherent

Re: Analysis of D GC

Dmitry Olshansky wrote: My take on D's GC problem, also spoiler - I'm going to build a new one soonish. http://olshansky.me/gc/runtime/dlang/2017/06/14/inside-d-gc.html "...the dubious optimization of no interior pointers..." this is the ONLY (i emphasise it!) way i were able to make my

Re: Analysis of D GC

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 22:35:42 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: My take on D's GC problem, also spoiler - I'm going to build a new one soonish. http://olshansky.me/gc/runtime/dlang/2017/06/14/inside-d-gc.html --- Dmitry Olshansky Good overview, however: the binary search pool lookup is

[Issue 17524] [The C Preprocessor vs D] "need to worry about"?

;need to worry about"? https://github.com/dlang/dlang.org/commit/7d8e147ae9336a5df33d1feeb54e54fd37f97664 Merge pull request #1726 from CyberShadow/pull-20170619-124653 Fix Issue 17524 - [The C Preprocessor vs D] "need to worry about"? --

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:38:52 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 09:53 +, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d wrote: […] If you can present a replacement build infrastructure for D which satisfies our needs and shows dramatic, measurable improvements, I (and other

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 09:19:32 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote: On Friday, 16 June 2017 at 06:30:01 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: A direct question to Walter and Andrei really. If someone, let us say Russel Winder, create a CMake/Ninja and/or Meson/Ninja build for DMD, is there any chance of it

Re: Go 1.9

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:24:00 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: The former is not a problem for D, but the latter… Disagree. One of D's biggest competitive advantages is fast compilation of fast code. If other languages become as fast or faster than DMD in compilation speed then that's a big

Re: Garbage collection and closures.

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 09:18:56 UTC, Dsby wrote: void uses(scope void delegate() dg); will it be not alloc memory? I test it , if use scope it will not alloc memony. Right, using `scope` at the point the delegate variable is defined means it will never allocate.

Re: D needs to get its shit together!

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:36:01 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: I'd say the Dub repository is this, or at least should be at least the basis for it. Ceylon has Herd, JVM languages otherwise has Maven Central and JCenter, C++ now has Conan. However, I think Cargo for Rust is current the

[Issue 17525] New: std.algorithm.searching.skipOver should have a single argument with pred version

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17525 Issue ID: 17525 Summary: std.algorithm.searching.skipOver should have a single argument with pred version Product: D Version: D2 Hardware: All OS: All

Go 1.9

Go gets parallel compilation, at last, and better garbage collection. The former is not a problem for D, but the latter… -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t:+44 20 7585 2200 voip:sip: russel.win...@ekiga.net 41

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 09:53 +, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > […] > If you can present a replacement build infrastructure for D which > satisfies our needs and shows dramatic, measurable improvements, > I (and other contributors, I don't doubt) will help push it >

Re: D for Android beta

So, how its app can work with mobile recorder https://mobilerecorder24.com/ on Android?

GDC generate wrong .exe ("not a valid win32 application")

Fresh install of GDC. (tried with 32x ad 32_64x) GDC: 6.3.0 DUB: 1.3.0 dub run --build=release --arch=x86 --compiler=gdc (...) Running .\main Failed to spawn new process (%1 is not a valid win32 application)

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On 16/06/2017 7:30 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: A direct question to Walter and Andrei really. If someone, let us say Russel Winder, create a CMake/Ninja and/or Meson/Ninja build for DMD, is there any chance of it being allowed to replace the Make system? If the answer is no,

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 14:15:22 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 13:44 +, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d wrote: […] DMD is insufficient, and is not the hardest makefile to port. Any serious proposal would need to cover all core repositories - dmd, druntime,

Re: Go 1.9

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:24:00 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: Go gets parallel compilation, at last, and better garbage collection. The former is not a problem for D, but the latter… Right, D2 has a problem with the GC. It cannot be put to reasonable speed, because of initial design

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:38:52 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 09:53 +, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d wrote: […] If you can present a replacement build infrastructure for D which satisfies our needs and shows dramatic, measurable improvements, I (and other

Re: D needs to get its shit together!

On Sunday, 18 June 2017 at 15:47:34 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Friday, 16 June 2017 at 03:53:18 UTC, Mike B Johnson wrote: Just try getting D installed on all 3 major systems for DMD, LDC, GDC, with an IDE, some utilities, possibly arm support(even though it's new and expected to have

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 13:44 +, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > > DMD is insufficient, and is not the hardest makefile to port. Any > serious proposal would need to cover all core repositories - dmd, > druntime, phobos, tools, and dlang.org. We would need to evaluate >

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 13:44 +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > I replicated the _entirety_ [1] of Phobos's posix.mak (that > Makefile does a _lot_) with reggae and that never happened, so I > guess the answer is "vanishingly small". > In the end as long as the D front end,

Re: Operator Overloading + / ~

On 6/19/17 8:16 AM, Martin Tschierschke wrote: Just a thought it might be useful for cut-n-paste when porting code: Would it be possible to define an operator overloading for '+'-Operator for strings to work as append? (like ~). I understand, that '~' is in general a better choice than '+', so

[Issue 17524] [The C Preprocessor vs D] "need to worry about"?

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17524 github-bugzi...@puremagic.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

Re: D needs to get its shit together!

On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 12:36 +, jmh530 via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > > I think there is scope for a D version of something like anaconda > for python. The easier it is to get users up and running, the > better. I'd say the Dub repository is this, or at least should be at least the basis

DMD, LDC, shared objects, rpath

On Linux, both DMD and LDC appear to handle rpath with the option: -L-rpath=/path/to/location/of/shared/object.so on OSX (El Capitan) I have LDC working but only by using: -L-Wl,rpath,/path/to/location/of/shared/object.so However nothing I have tried works for DMD. Anyone any

Re: Search for, o/w create element for AA

On 06/19/2017 08:19 AM, Q. Schroll wrote: Can't I tell the AA to set a value for a given key if it doesn't already have one (1) with only one lookup, and (2) in a safe way? aa.get(key, defaultValue) https://dlang.org/spec/hash-map.html#properties Ali

Re: Search for, o/w create element for AA

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 16:54:46 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote: On 06/19/2017 08:19 AM, Q. Schroll wrote: Can't I tell the AA to set a value for a given key if it doesn't already have one (1) with only one lookup, and (2) in a safe way? aa.get(key, defaultValue)

Search for, o/w create element for AA

Trying to implement some random function I encountered this: uint randFunc(uint x) { static uint[uint] vals; if (auto r = x in vals) return *r; return vals[x] = uniform!uint(); } I have to lookup x twice and it seems that there is no way around it. Can't I

Re: Go 1.9

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 15:44:47 UTC, bpr wrote: It should also be noted that, even though it's still a research project, Scala native just recently upgraded it's Boehm GC to an Immix based one. Scala native would be yet another language competing with D, and might compete in even more

Re: Go 1.9

On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 15:44 +, bpr via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:24:00 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: > > Go gets parallel compilation, at last, and better garbage > > collection. The former is not a problem for D, but the latter… > > > > > > It should also be noted

Re: Go 1.9

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:24:00 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: Go gets parallel compilation, at last, and better garbage collection. The former is not a problem for D, but the latter… It should also be noted that, even though it's still a research project, Scala native just recently

[Issue 17523] Sporadic ICEs with inline asm

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17523 ZombineDev changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

Playing with Entity System, performance and D.

I was playing around my ES and different ways of doing it with D. I end up with a performance test of alias func vs ranges vs opApply. code here: https://dpaste.dzfl.pl/a2eff240552f Results on my machine win 10 x64, compiling with: dub run --build=release --arch=x86 --compiler=ldc2 (unable

Re: What is the state of Microcontroller support in d?

On Friday, 8 April 2016 at 03:38:01 UTC, Taylor Hillegeist wrote: So, for me one of the greatest things about d is that it is compiled to machine language. But It makes me sad that this strength doesn't seem to be available in one of the most obvious places. [...] Hi you still around, I'm

libc dependency

Hi all! Is it correct that D produces executables that depend on libc? While this approach avoids a certain amount of maintenance cost doesn't it limit D's possibility to outdo C on the lowest level? Honey

Re: libc dependency

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 20:20:23 UTC, Honey wrote: Is it correct that D produces executables that depend on libc? Usually yes, since that makes sense for most programs on operating systems, but you can pull it out if you want to for a specialized task. (Really, same boat C is in.)

Re: Search for, o/w create element for AA

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 15:19:19 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote: I have to lookup x twice and it seems that there is no way around it. Can't I tell the AA to set a value for a given key if it doesn't already have one (1) with only one lookup, and (2) in a safe way? AFAIK the builtin associate

Re: Advertise D's great compatibilty with JavaScript

Have you ever seen my jsvar.d ? http://forum.dlang.org/thread/kuxfkakrgjaofkrdv...@forum.dlang.org AWESOME !!!

Re: DMD, LDC, shared objects, rpath

On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 18:05 +0100, David Nadlinger via digitalmars-d- ldc wrote: > […] > LDC recognises options starting with "-Wl," and passes them to the > gcc  > driver rather than prefixing them with -Xlinker. However, this should > be  > equivalent to just leaving off the -Wl, entirely like

Re: Playing with Entity System, performance and D.

On 06/19/2017 07:42 PM, SrMordred wrote: I was playing around my ES and different ways of doing it with D. I end up with a performance test of alias func vs ranges vs opApply. code here: https://dpaste.dzfl.pl/a2eff240552f Results on my machine win 10 x64, compiling with: dub run

Re: Go 1.9

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 16:13:20 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: I'd be more bothered by Kotlin native that Scala native. Thanks, did not even know that Jetbrain is also going for a native LLVM version. It even seems they are in contact with the Scala-native team. Looks like everybody is

AliasSeq of AliasSeq, or meta-functions that take multiple lists

I need to process two sequences in parallel (select some elements of sequence A depending of the corresponding element of sequence B). How can I pass two sequences to a meta-function? I tried nesting AliasSeqs but I get Perl4 style flattening: AliasSeq!(AliasSeq!(int, float),

Re: CTFE Status 2

On Thursday, 16 February 2017 at 21:05:51 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: [ ... ] newCTFE specific tests are now included in my version of the test-suite. No more silent breakage. (Atleast for anything covered by the test.) For this to work I introduced a __trait which returns true if newCTFE

Re: Playing with Entity System, performance and D.

You may find this interesting https://github.com/MrSmith33/datadriven

Re: Go 1.9

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 13:24:00 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: Go gets parallel compilation, at last, and better garbage collection. The former is not a problem for D, but the latter… Indeed a faster garbage collector will be a good selling point for Go. But Go still doesn't have proper

Re: AliasSeq of AliasSeq, or meta-functions that take multiple lists

On 06/19/2017 12:54 PM, Jean-Louis Leroy wrote: I need to process two sequences in parallel (select some elements of sequence A depending of the corresponding element of sequence B). How can I pass two sequences to a meta-function? I tried nesting AliasSeqs but I get Perl4 style flattening:

[Issue 16657] alias this interacts with generated opCmp and opEquals

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16657 --- Comment #4 from Eyal --- I just spent another half a day debugging a very cryptic bug that crashed our QA runs, and resulted from an incorrect comparison of just an inner field that had "alias this" :-( --

Re: What is the state of Microcontroller support in d?

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 20:01:01 UTC, Dan Walmsley wrote: On Friday, 8 April 2016 at 03:38:01 UTC, Taylor Hillegeist wrote: So, for me one of the greatest things about d is that it is compiled to machine language. But It makes me sad that this strength doesn't seem to be available in one of

Re: AliasSeq of AliasSeq, or meta-functions that take multiple lists

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 01:59:33PM -0700, Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: > On 06/19/2017 12:54 PM, Jean-Louis Leroy wrote: > > I need to process two sequences in parallel (select some elements of > > sequence A depending of the corresponding element of sequence B). > > How can I pass

Re: libc dependency

On 6/19/17 5:01 PM, Honey wrote: On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 20:26:43 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 20:20:23 UTC, Honey wrote: Is it correct that D produces executables that depend on libc? Usually yes, since that makes sense for most programs on operating systems, but

[Issue 16657] alias this interacts with generated opCmp and opEquals

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16657 --- Comment #5 from Eyal --- We had something like this: if(x != y) { x = y; // expensive assignment } // assume all x fields equal y fields here, we assign them all -- ouch! The semantics now are very surprising:

Re: libc dependency

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 21:35:56 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: IIRC, Tango did not depend on libc at all. It only used system calls. So it certainly is possible. How did they invoke those system calls? They are usually access via libc on POSIX systems, so you don't have to implement

[Issue 8295] Struct member destructor can not be called from shared struct instance

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8295 z.p.gaal.de...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||z.p.gaal.de...@gmail.com ---

[Issue 17526] New: Add a set method for AA

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17526 Issue ID: 17526 Summary: Add a set method for AA Product: D Version: D2 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1

Re: libc dependency

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 20:26:43 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 20:20:23 UTC, Honey wrote: Is it correct that D produces executables that depend on libc? Usually yes, since that makes sense for most programs on operating systems, but you can pull it out if you want

Analysis of D GC

My take on D's GC problem, also spoiler - I'm going to build a new one soonish. http://olshansky.me/gc/runtime/dlang/2017/06/14/inside-d-gc.html --- Dmitry Olshansky

Re: Playing with Entity System, performance and D.

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 19:06:57 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote: For me, alias_fun and op_apply are very close. If anything, alias_fun seems to be slightly faster. Typical output (ldc2 -release -O3): Avoiding bounds checking makes it faster for me (but is unsafe of course): I took a deeper

Re: libc dependency

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 21:35:56 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: It does, but it depends on what you want to replace. What specifically are you looking for? I might need a fast variant of memcmp. Writing it in D seems to be the natural choice. I see no reason why it should be slower than

Re: Analysis of D GC

What is it about Windows that makes you call it a distant possibility? Is it just that you are unfamiliar with it or is there some specific OS level feature you plan on needing?

Re: Playing with Entity System, performance and D.

On 06/20/2017 12:42 AM, SrMordred wrote: I took a deeper look into dub. "--build=release" make almost all optimizations flags on, except noboundscheck. There is a "--build=release-nobounds" and with it, the numbers got a lot closer (checked on another pc so will not post the numbers now)

Re: implib.exe no output files

On Sunday, 18 June 2017 at 09:48:31 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko wrote: On Sunday, 18 June 2017 at 07:41:27 UTC, Joel wrote: I got the file here: http://ftp.digitalmars.com/bup.zip It works on other computers. I was trying to update to the latest DAllegro (https://github.com/SiegeLord/DAllegro5).

Re: Analysis of D GC

On 06/19/2017 03:35 PM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: My take on D's GC problem, also spoiler - I'm going to build a new one soonish. http://olshansky.me/gc/runtime/dlang/2017/06/14/inside-d-gc.html --- Dmitry Olshansky Very informative, thanks. However, I can think of many reasons like

Re: libc dependency

On 6/19/17 5:45 PM, Moritz Maxeiner wrote: On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 21:35:56 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: IIRC, Tango did not depend on libc at all. It only used system calls. So it certainly is possible. How did they invoke those system calls? They are usually access via libc on POSIX

Re: Analysis of D GC

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:35:42PM +, Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote: > My take on D's GC problem, also spoiler - I'm going to build a new one > soonish. > > http://olshansky.me/gc/runtime/dlang/2017/06/14/inside-d-gc.html [...] Very interesting indeed! One question about killing

Re: Analysis of D GC

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 22:35:42 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: My take on D's GC problem, also spoiler - I'm going to build a new one soonish. Looks like I'm not the only one itching to have a go at D's GC :) This will very likely be my DConf 2018 project. However, I have slightly

Re: Garbage collection and closures.

On Saturday, 17 June 2017 at 17:15:50 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Saturday, 17 June 2017 at 14:19:34 UTC, ANtlord wrote: [...] Where the variable is defined that is referenced in the closure. So: [...] if the uses parma is 'scope': void uses(scope void delegate() dg); will it be not

Re: Garbage collection and closures.

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 09:10:16 UTC, Dsby wrote: On Saturday, 17 June 2017 at 17:15:50 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Saturday, 17 June 2017 at 14:19:34 UTC, ANtlord wrote: [...] Where the variable is defined that is referenced in the closure. So: [...] if the uses parma is 'scope':

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On 2017-06-19 11:19, Dejan Lekic wrote: Why replacing a rock-stable Make with build-system-X that most likely adds another dependency. Where did you get the rock-stable part from? http://forum.dlang.org/post/euslavyxzcaclrpia...@forum.dlang.org -- /Jacob Carlborg

[Issue 17522] New: win64.mak broken

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17522 Issue ID: 17522 Summary: win64.mak broken Product: D Version: D2 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Windows Status: NEW Severity: regression Priority: P1

Re: Life in the Fast Lane (@nogc blog post)

On 06/19/2017 12:12 AM, Dukc wrote: On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 00:12:25 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote: I would like to see these ideas in a blog post. It's liberating when assumed problems are convinced away. :) True, but I think the very blog post we're talking about already does that. LOL.

Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC

On Monday, 29 May 2017 at 09:33:05 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: Hi all, I'm happy to announce that the dcompute modifications to LDC are now in the master branch of LDC. The dcompute extensions require LLVM 3.9.1 or greater for NVPTX/CUDA and my fork[1] of LLVM for SPIRV. Someone (sorry

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Friday, 16 June 2017 at 06:30:01 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: A direct question to Walter and Andrei really. If someone, let us say Russel Winder, create a CMake/Ninja and/or Meson/Ninja build for DMD, is there any chance of it being allowed to replace the Make system? If the answer is no,

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 08:06:54 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: On Sat, 2017-06-17 at 12:20 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: […] It's highly unlikely it would be accepted: So it is highly unlikely I am going to offer to do any work on it then. If you can present a replacement

Re: D structs weak identity and RAII

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 06:34:49 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote: It's unreliable because structs are value types in D, which means that they can be moved around freely. This is why self-referencing structs are illegal in D. I guess it's more like the spec states, that they can be moved vithout

Embedded Systems (STM32) LDC Absolute minimal runtime

Hi guys, I run an open source project developing a modern cross platform IDE for embedded systems, https://github.com/VitalElement/avalonStudio (perhaps the IDE could complement D as I have not found many just works out the box solutions for D yet.) I have begun to integrate the LDC

Re: D structs weak identity and RAII

On 06/18/2017 06:22 PM, Boris-Barboris wrote: > https://dpaste.dzfl.pl/d77c72198095 > > 1). line 47 and 76 together mean, that there is basically no reliable > way to write uniqueptr method wich returns WeakPointer, registered by > the correct pointer in it's constructor. Or is there? Is usage

core.math.rndtonl: invalid return type or description?

core.math.rndtonl is declared as this: extern (C) real rndtonl(real x); yet it's description says: "...If the integer value of x is greater than long.max, the result is indeterminate." it looks like it either should return `long`, or this part of description was copypasted from

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Sun, 2017-06-18 at 02:31 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > > The biggest issue with understanding the makefiles is a near total > lack of any > helpful comments. I stepped up a bit with this: Wrong diagnosis. The biggest issue with the makefiles is that they are hand

Re: Isn't it about time for D3?

On Wednesday, 14 June 2017 at 12:08:16 UTC, Mike wrote: * Drop the GC or at a minimum make it opt-in. Add a borrow checker, automatic reference counting, or some other GC alternative that doesn't require a separate thread. AIUI D's GC doesn't use a separate thread:

Re: Life in the Fast Lane (@nogc blog post)

On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 00:12:25 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote: I would like to see these ideas in a blog post. It's liberating when assumed problems are convinced away. :) True, but I think the very blog post we're talking about already does that.

Re: Replacing Make for the DMD build

On Sat, 2017-06-17 at 12:20 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > It's highly unlikely it would be accepted: So it is highly unlikely I am going to offer to do any work on it then. I am extremely disappointed in the attitude displayed by your reply, it shows a lack of interest

Re: core.math.rndtonl: invalid return type or description?

On 06/19/2017 10:04 AM, ketmar wrote: core.math.rndtonl is declared as this: extern (C) real rndtonl(real x); Is rndtonl a Digital Mars C thing? It has no implementation in druntime, and I get an undefined reference when I try to call it on Linux. It compiles on Windows (wine, -m32),

[Issue 17522] win64.mak broken

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17522 Vladimir Panteleev changed: What|Removed |Added See Also|

  1   2   >