SublimeLinter-contrib-dmd: dmd feedback as you type. v1.1.0: DUB integration.

On Tuesday, 31 October 2017 at 16:06:24 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote: On Tuesday, 31 October 2017 at 13:32:34 UTC, SrMordred wrote: Thank you , works perfectly! One idea: Integrating with dub. So you don´t have to manually set lib dirs and flags since its all on 'dub.json' already. You can

[Issue 17975] D produces mangling incompatible with C++

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17975 ZombineDev changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||C++, mangling

Re: Distinct "static" parent property contents for children

On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 17:46:42 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 17:38:27 UTC, Timoses wrote: Are there better options/ways of achieving this? What are you actually trying to achieve? What are you using these variables for? Well, I have the following

How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

Any experience reports or general suggestions? I've used only D threads so far.

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 11:08:21 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: Any experience reports or general suggestions? I've used only D threads so far. It would be far easier if you use druntime + @nogc and/or de-register latency-sensitive threads from druntime [1], so they're not interrupted

[Issue 17976] New: core.exception.AssertError@ddmd/dsymbolsem.d(1624)

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17976 Issue ID: 17976 Summary: core.exception.AssertError@ddmd/dsymbolsem.d(1624) Product: D Version: D2 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 00:09:32 UTC, Joakim wrote: ... I think you greatly overestimate what was needed to compete in this mobile market at that time. I'm not saying it was easy, but the PC and mobile giants before iOS/Android clearly didn't have the vision or ability to execute

Re: ddox empty public methods/interfaces etc

On 11/8/17 10:45 PM, Andrey wrote: I just added to dub.json this: "-ddoxFilterArgs": [     "--min-protection=Public" ] i.e. without --only-documented option, in this way ddox will generate documentation for all public methods, even if there is no docstring. Interesting. I misunderstood

Re: [OT] mobile rising

I also think we should add to this discussion that Google was hellbent on going forward with Android even when it was clearly inferior. Apple tried to squish out Google's services from their iOS products for a while. And that is exactly what Google tries to prevent by funding things like

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 14:22:22 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: I also think we should add to this discussion that Google was hellbent on going forward with Android even when it was clearly inferior. Apple tried to squish out Google's services from their iOS products for a while. And

Re: Cannot reduce an empty iterable w/o an explicit seed value

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:40:49 UTC, Vino wrote: Hi All, Request your help, when i execute the below line of code i am getting an error message as "Cannot reduce an empty iterable w/o an explicit seed value" , The below lie of code will iterate several file system and will report

Re: Cannot reduce an empty iterable w/o an explicit seed value

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:40:49 UTC, Vino wrote: Hi All, Request your help, when i execute the below line of code i am getting an error message as "Cannot reduce an empty iterable w/o an explicit seed value" , The below lie of code will iterate several file system and will report

Re: Distinct "static" parent property contents for children

On 11/9/17 7:34 AM, Timoses wrote: I suppose this is what Adam suggested, correct? Yes, more or less. It's just an actual implementation vs. a description in case it wasn't clear. This is a more general question: Why is it not possible to implement/override static methods? Static

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:19:00 UTC, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 11:08:21 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: Any experience reports or general suggestions? I've used only D threads so far. It would be far easier if you use druntime + @nogc and/or

[Issue 17974] getSymbolsByUDA is returns unusable symbols when used in foreach

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17974 --- Comment #3 from Artem Borisovskiy --- Thanks, but I already found another way of doing it, by using __traits(getMember...). Anyway, both my and your solutions are ugly hacks. They make code even less readable than it was before.

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:43:54 UTC, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:30:49 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: On 09/11/2017 12:19 PM, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 11:08:21 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: Any experience reports

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 00:09:32 UTC, Joakim wrote: smaller search company, did with Android, leaving aside Apple because of your silly claims that their existing software gave them a headstart, which is why those former computing giants are all either dead or fading fast. It is

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 14:15:47 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 00:09:32 UTC, Joakim wrote: smaller search company, did with Android, leaving aside Apple because of your silly claims that their existing software gave them a headstart, which is why those

Cannot reduce an empty iterable w/o an explicit seed value

Hi All, Request your help, when i execute the below line of code i am getting an error message as "Cannot reduce an empty iterable w/o an explicit seed value" , The below lie of code will iterate several file system and will report the size of the folder (level 1) which is greater than

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:30:49 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: On 09/11/2017 12:19 PM, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 11:08:21 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: Any experience reports or general suggestions? I've used only D threads so far. It would be far

[Issue 17975] D produces mangling incompatible with C++

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17975 ki...@gmx.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ki...@gmx.net --- Comment #1 from

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 13:00:15 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:19:00 UTC, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 11:08:21 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: Any experience reports or general suggestions? I've used only D threads so far.

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 16:08:20 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2017-11-09 13:19, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: Though you need to be extra careful not to use thread-local storage I think TLS should work, it's the OS that handles TLS, not druntime. Thanks for reminding me, I keep

Re: Any book recommendation for writing a compiler?

Thanks for those references! I'm also interested in looking through those. I had computation theory in college a long time ago but never took a compiler course. On 11/7/2017 5:26 AM, Tony wrote: Author Allen Holub has made his out-of-print book, Compiler Design in C, available as a free

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On 2017-11-09 13:19, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: Though you need to be extra careful not to use thread-local storage I think TLS should work, it's the OS that handles TLS, not druntime. -- /Jacob Carlborg

[Issue 17935] [scope] auto-generated destructor not scope aware

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17935 --- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/dlang/dmd https://github.com/dlang/dmd/commit/c9ff5810a2f449f19a39172461d511c895dcb519 fix Issue 17935 - [scope] auto-generated destructor not scope

[Issue 17935] [scope] auto-generated destructor not scope aware

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17935 github-bugzi...@puremagic.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Issue 17467] BitArray are broken with <<= 64

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17467 github-bugzi...@puremagic.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On 2017-11-09 17:52, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: Thanks for reminding me, I keep forgetting that it should just work (minus initialization?). What do you mean "initialization"? Any type that can be used in C in TLS should work in D as well (except for macOS 32bit, if anyone cares). --

[Issue 17467] BitArray are broken with <<= 64

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17467 --- Comment #1 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/dlang/phobos https://github.com/dlang/phobos/commit/997eb6229981bb1a28f160175c89dba0e52eae96 Fix Issue 17467 - BitArray are broken with <<= 64

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 14:42:41 UTC, Joakim wrote: Do you blame them, given such anti-competitive measures long undertaken by MS and Apple? Big businesses do what they can get away with. Once upon a time governments cared about anti-trust (E.g. AT and IBM), but nowadays it seems

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 14:42:41 UTC, Joakim wrote: There is some truth to this, but if you cannot compete with a free product- cough, cough, Windows Mobile- I don't know what to tell you. In other words, google cannot afford to spend a fraction of the money on Android that Apple

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, November 09, 2017 23:42:37 codephantom via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 11:47:32 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > Oh, I'm all for using FreeBSD, but most of the arguments for > > using FreeBSD over Windows apply to Linux. And if you can't get > > someone

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 11:47:32 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: Oh, I'm all for using FreeBSD, but most of the arguments for using FreeBSD over Windows apply to Linux. And if you can't get someone to switch from Windows to Linux, you're not going to get them to switch to FreeBSD.

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On 09/11/2017 4:00 PM, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 13:00:15 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:19:00 UTC, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 11:08:21 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: Any experience reports or

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 00:23:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I don't disagree that there are differences between FreeBSD and Linux, but my point is that for most folks, the differences are small enough that it's not all that different from trying to convince someone to use one Linux

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 14:42:41 UTC, Joakim wrote: As I said earlier, the mobile OS story is not over yet, there are more changes to come. Yeah...like more factories making more dongles. You want a dongle? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XSC_UG5_kU

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 00:23:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: Plenty of us do get picky about details, which would lead us to one or the other, depending on our preferences, but there are way more similarities than differences - to the point that to many folks, the differences seem

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 01:15:26 UTC, Jerry wrote: Not much of a technie nerd if it "just finished" and you've already exhausted your knowledge and have given up :). Just sayin'. Well, everytime I wanted to find something, I had to google it... Then I realised I had to pay for it as

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 01:04:05 UTC, codephantom wrote: On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 00:23:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I don't disagree that there are differences between FreeBSD and Linux, but my point is that for most folks, the differences are small enough that it's not all

Conditional compilation of array of structs initializer

Doing a port of some C code that has an #ifdef in the middle of an initialization for an array of structs. I am getting a compile error trying to get equivalent behavior with "static if" or "version". Is there a way to achieve this other than making two separate array initialization sections?

ircbod2 - easy IRC bots in D

Nothing fantastic but I've refreshed an old library called "ircbod", it allows to create IRC bots very easily. https://code.dlang.org/packages/ircbod2 https://github.com/BBasile/ircbod2 "easily" means "register callbacks".

Re: How you guys go about -BetterC Multithreading?

On 09/11/2017 12:19 PM, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 11:08:21 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: Any experience reports or general suggestions? I've used only D threads so far. It would be far easier if you use druntime + @nogc and/or de-register latency-sensitive

Re: Distinct "static" parent property contents for children

On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 18:33:15 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: On 11/8/17 12:38 PM, Timoses wrote: Hey, wrapping my head around this atm.. [snip] so what you want is a static variable per subclass, but that the base class can access. What I would recommend is this: abstract

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 12:27:49 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 00:09:32 UTC, Joakim wrote: ... I think you greatly overestimate what was needed to compete in this mobile market at that time. I'm not saying it was easy, but the PC and mobile giants before

Re: [OT] mobile rising

On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 01:19:06 UTC, codephantom wrote: Well, everytime I wanted to find something, I had to google it... Then I realised I had to pay for it as well...and, that's when i gave up. Bill Gates wasn't the richest man in the world for so long without reason. ;)

Re: Project Elvis

On 11/6/17 12:20, Michael wrote: I can't quite see why this proposal is such a big deal to people - as has been restated, it's just a quick change in the parser for a slight contraction in the code, and nothing language-breaking, it's not a big change to the language at all. On Monday, 6

Re: Conditional compilation of array of structs initializer

On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 06:22:51 UTC, Tony wrote: Doing a port of some C code that has an #ifdef in the middle of an initialization for an array of structs. I am getting a compile error trying to get equivalent behavior with "static if" or "version". Is there a way to achieve this other

Re: Distinct "static" parent property contents for children

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 14:34:10 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: On 11/9/17 7:34 AM, Timoses wrote: I suppose this is what Adam suggested, correct? Yes, more or less. It's just an actual implementation vs. a description in case it wasn't clear. [...] It's not much different

Re: Conditional compilation of array of structs initializer

Thanks Mike!