On 2014-11-01 01:54, Michel Fortin wrote:
I can't remember if this is an oversight or just something that I hadn't
got to yet. In my mind this was already done.
I did a grep for dealloc and couldn't find anything related.
Anyway, the answer is *yes*: the destructor should be mapped to the
On 2014-11-01 01:58, Michel Fortin wrote:
That said, there are other parts of D/Objective-C that could pose
difficulties to existing languages tools, some syntactic (__selector, or
this.class to get the metaclass)
this.class could perhaps be called this.classof, at least that's
valid syntax.
If you still need a copy of Andrei's great book:
http://www.informit.com/deals/
Regards,
Kai
I may be ignorant, can someone explain what's the difference
between:
Container container;
container.register!(IGreeter, Greeter);
auto greeter = container.get!IGreeter();
writefln(greeter.greet)
and
auto greeter = new Greeter();
writefln(greeter.greet)
?
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 16:36:02 UTC, JN wrote:
I may be ignorant, can someone explain what's the difference
between:
Container container;
container.register!(IGreeter, Greeter);
auto greeter = container.get!IGreeter();
writefln(greeter.greet)
and
auto greeter = new Greeter();
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 18:54:04 UTC, Gary Willoughby
wrote:
It's the fundamental way dependency injection containers are
used. Instead of having complex dependencies on other resources
you can just rely on the container to serve resources as needed.
For example if you have a class
Usually an object receives all needed dependencies with the
constructor and thus doesn't need the container itself. Well,
either way, it's better to pass one object around instead of ~10
or more.
On Thursday, 30 October 2014 at 01:02:40 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
https://code.dawg.eu/reducing-vibed-turnaround-time-part-1-faster-linking.html
Could you add a reference on how to DUB-build a library as
dynamic instead of static library to easy the process for
newcomers?
From the homepage[1]: Chocolatey is a Machine Package Manager,
somewhat like apt-get, but built with Windows in mind.
I have added dmd[2] and dub[3] as packages. This means you can do
command line installation and have them ready to go in one step.
I also made sure to allow users to change
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 01:52:27 UTC, Daniel Jost wrote:
From the homepage[1]: Chocolatey is a Machine Package Manager,
somewhat like apt-get, but built with Windows in mind.
I have added dmd[2] and dub[3] as packages. This means you can
do command line installation and have them ready
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 05:27:16 UTC, Jonathan Marler
wrote:
No need for the extra function, just call:
x.toString((outputRange.put));
That doesn't work for a wide variety of possible cases, notably
when `put` is a function template or when the code depends on
std.range.put or some
On 10/30/2014 8:30 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
This is a typical mechanism that Tango used -- pass in a ref to a dynamic array
referencing a stack buffer. If it needed to grow, just update the length, and it
moves to the heap. In most cases, the stack buffer is enough. But the idea is to
try
The module declaration, and the name and path of D files do not
need to match each other. You include a D file while compiling
the project, and module declarations are cared only.
Based on above behaviour of design, allowing only one module
keyword, and that is on top of D code file seems
On Wednesday, 29 October 2014 at 07:41:41 UTC, FrankLike wrote:
Hello,everyone,
I've written some projects in C#,find the 'partial' keyword
is very userful,which lets the auto codes in another single
file,my codes are very easy to update.
But what the same thing in D?
Thank you,every one.
Hello.
let's run this code:
struct Info {
size_t[] list;
}
size_t saveIt (ref Info info, size_t count) {
if (count 1) return 666;
size_t idx = info.list.length;
info.list.length = idx+count;
foreach (; 0..count) {
info.list[idx] = saveIt(info, count-1); //!!!
http://dlang.org/phobos/std_typecons.html#.Rebindable
tcak:
Is there any VERY SPECIAL reason behind that limitation?
What advantages gives removing that limitation? Is the price in
increased complexity worth paying?
Bye,
bearophile
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 09:24:46 +
bearophile via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
tcak:
Is there any VERY SPECIAL reason behind that limitation?
What advantages gives removing that limitation? Is the price in
increased complexity worth paying?
nested modules, like in
On Friday, 31 October 2014 at 21:33:22 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Again, you're using a different definition of component.
I see no justified reasoning why process can be considered such
component ad anything else cannot.
In practice it is completely dependent on system design
Am 01.11.2014 um 10:29 schrieb ketmar via Digitalmars-d:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 09:24:46 +
bearophile via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
tcak:
Is there any VERY SPECIAL reason behind that limitation?
What advantages gives removing that limitation? Is the price in
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 11:04:32 +0100
Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Am 01.11.2014 um 10:29 schrieb ketmar via Digitalmars-d:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 09:24:46 +
bearophile via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
tcak:
Is there any VERY
On Saturday, November 01, 2014 07:52:38 tcak via Digitalmars-d wrote:
The module declaration, and the name and path of D files do not
need to match each other. You include a D file while compiling
the project, and module declarations are cared only.
Based on above behaviour of design,
filled bugreport for this:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13670
On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 19:38:14 dan via Digitalmars-d wrote:
What IDE/EDITOR do you use for D? What plugins if you use Vim?
I Use gvim with most of the GUI elements turned off (I'm just trying to get a
window for it separate from the console, which is why I don't use vim). The
only thing
On Friday, 31 October 2014 at 21:33:22 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
You're using a different definition of component.
System granularity is decided by the designer. You either allow
people design their systems or force your design on them, if you
do both, you contradict yourself.
On Friday, 31 October 2014 at 21:06:49 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
This does not mean that process isolation is a silver bullet
-- I
never said any such thing.
But made it sound that way:
The only failsafe solution is to have multiple redundant
processes, so when one process
On Wednesday, 29 October 2014 at 21:23:00 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
In any case, if the programmer knows than assert error is
restricted to a particular domain, and is recoverable, and
wants to recover from it, use enforce(), not assert().
But all that does is working around the assert's
Third part of the A Programming Language for Games, by Jonathan
Blow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTqZNujQOlA
Discussions:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2kxi89/jonathan_blow_a_programming_language_for_games/
His language seems to disallow comparisons of different types:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 09:03:42 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
as i can guess, the bug is in evaluating left part of '='
operation
before the right part.
I don't know how D defines this, and I couldn't find anything but
a forum discussion [1] (which I didn't read all of). But
If it's indeed caused by evaluation (which seems likely), then
it's not a bug. All expressions are supposed to be evaluated from
left to right.
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 11:43:11 +
via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
If it's indeed caused by evaluation (which seems likely), then
it's not a bug. All expressions are supposed to be evaluated from
left to right.
this *IS* a bug. either compiler should error on this, or it
On 1 November 2014 11:31, anonymous via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 09:03:42 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
as i can guess, the bug is in evaluating left part of '=' operation
before the right part.
I don't know how D defines this,
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 11:31:51 +
anonymous via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
I don't know how D defines this, and I couldn't find anything but
a forum discussion [1] (which I didn't read all of). But unless
it's explicitly stated that the right-hand side is evaluated
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 11:50:34 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
this *IS* a bug. either compiler should error on this, or it
shouldn't
modify random memory. imagine the situation when old array
contents not
only collected by GC, but that memory was allocated to something
On 1 November 2014 11:56, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 11:31:51 +
anonymous via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
I don't know how D defines this, and I couldn't find anything but
a forum discussion [1] (which I didn't read
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 11:55:53 +
anonymous via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 11:50:34 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
this *IS* a bug. either compiler should error on this, or it
shouldn't
modify random memory. imagine the
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:01:04 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 1 November 2014 11:56, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 11:31:51 +
anonymous via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
I
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:01:04 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 1 November 2014 11:56, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 11:31:51 +
anonymous via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
I
On 1 November 2014 09:03, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Hello.
let's run this code:
info.list[idx] = saveIt(info, count-1); //!!!
You could use:
emplace(info.list[idx], saveIt(info, count-1));
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 07:02:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 10/30/2014 8:30 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
This is a typical mechanism that Tango used -- pass in a ref
to a dynamic array
referencing a stack buffer. If it needed to grow, just update
the length, and it
moves to the
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:34:50 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 1 November 2014 09:03, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Hello.
let's run this code:
info.list[idx] = saveIt(info, count-1); //!!!
You could use:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 06:04:56 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 05:27:16 UTC, Jonathan Marler
wrote:
No need for the extra function, just call:
x.toString((outputRange.put));
That doesn't work for a wide variety of possible cases, notably
when `put` is a
On 1 November 2014 12:39, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:34:50 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 1 November 2014 09:03, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Hello.
let's run
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 10:04:23 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 01.11.2014 um 10:29 schrieb ketmar via Digitalmars-d:
A few languages have nested packages. Quite usefull for
implementation packages.
Beware of Wirth's quest for simplicity, even Go is a quite
powerful in regards to
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 12:31:15 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 07:02:03 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 10/30/2014 8:30 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
This is a typical mechanism that Tango used -- pass in a ref
to a dynamic array
referencing a stack buffer. If it
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:58:26 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Or how about: Every side effect is evaluated LTR. So whatever you do,
don't have LHS-altering side-effects on the RHS. It may be over the
top to explain simply that it is questionable and
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 13:04:57 +
tcak via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
My biggest concern is that just to collect similar things
together (mostly small things), I have to create another new file
which makes me feel grrr.
if they are so similar, put them in one module.
On 31 October 2014 01:30, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 10/28/14 7:06 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 28 October 2014 22:51, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 10/27/14 8:01 PM, Manu via
I have Visual Studio 2012 and Windows SDK for Windows 8.1
installed. I then used the DMD installer, which appears to have
correctly found them:
; Windows installer replaces the following lines with the actual
paths
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 11:31:32 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Third part of the A Programming Language for Games, by
Jonathan Blow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTqZNujQOlA
Thanks for the link. I only have time to skim it, but I think the
region-based allocation that he was concerned
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 13:04:58 UTC, tcak wrote:
My biggest concern is that just to collect similar things
together (mostly small things), I have to create another new
file
which makes me feel grrr.
I am afraid you need to get used to it because it is fundamental
design
On 1 November 2014 05:06, via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 at 19:04:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 10/27/2014 12:42 AM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
I'm planning on doing a pull request for druntime which rewrites every
toString
function within
On 31 October 2014 06:15, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On 10/30/14 2:53 PM, Jonathan Marler wrote:
Before we start ripping apart our existing APIs, can we show that the
performance is really going to be so bad? I know virtual calls have a
bad
Bringing this back to the first page
On 1 November 2014 13:05, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:58:26 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Or how about: Every side effect is evaluated LTR. So whatever you do,
don't have LHS-altering side-effects
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 10:32:48 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Saturday, November 01, 2014 07:52:38 tcak via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
The module declaration, and the name and path of D files do
not
need to match each other. You include a D file while compiling
the
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 14:03:50 +
Nicolas Sicard via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
What's the reason why the module keyword was introduced in the
first place? The package and module hierarchy could have been
deduced from the directory and file hierarchy, as it is the case
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 07:52:39 UTC, tcak wrote:
The module declaration, and the name and path of D files do
not need to match each other. You include a D file while
compiling the project, and module declarations are cared only.
Based on above behaviour of design, allowing only one
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 13:56:49 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
So your only solution is to pre-allocate the ptr in the GC to prevent
the .ptr from moving because it has been reallocated to another area
to accommodate growth.
if this will be left as is, the
On 1 November 2014 14:19, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 13:56:49 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
if such assigns will be forbidden for any arrays... this is even worse.
what? your shiny language can't do
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:03:51 UTC, Nicolas Sicard
wrote:
What's the reason why the module keyword was introduced in the
first place? The package and module hierarchy could have been
deduced from the directory and file hierarchy, as it is the
case in Python, IIRC. The search rules
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:18:53 UTC, Mike wrote:
I find this, and the fact that packages and modules map
directly to directories and files, to be an arbitrary
limitation as well.
It is not necessary but it results in elegant mapping. I wish it
pushed harder for module == namespace
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:40:16 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:03:51 UTC, Nicolas Sicard
wrote:
What's the reason why the module keyword was introduced in the
first place? The package and module hierarchy could have been
deduced from the directory and file
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 14:44:54 +
Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
You can clearly see the 'list.length' though. You can't possibly go
off the assumption that if you grow the size of a dynamic array, it's
area in memory won't be relocated.
i don't even want to
On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 10:52:31AM +, Kagamin via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 at 21:06:49 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
This does not mean that process isolation is a silver bullet -- I
never said any such thing.
But made it sound that way:
The only
On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 09:38:23AM +, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 at 21:33:22 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
Again, you're using a different definition of component.
I see no justified reasoning why process can be considered such
component ad
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 15:02:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
I never said component == process. All I said was that at
the OS
level, at least with current OSes, processes are the smallest
unit
that is decoupled from each other. If you go below that level of
granularity,
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:48:33 UTC, Nicolas Sicard
wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:40:16 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:03:51 UTC, Nicolas Sicard
wrote:
What's the reason why the module keyword was introduced in
the first place? The package and
On 01.11.2014 14:25, Josh wrote:
I have Visual Studio 2012 and Windows SDK for Windows 8.1 installed. I
then used the DMD installer, which appears to have correctly found them:
; Windows installer replaces the
On 11/1/2014 3:35 AM, Kagamin wrote:
No misunderstanding, I think that Walter's idea is good, just not always
practical, and that real critical systems don't work the way he describes, they
make more complicated tradeoffs.
My ideas are what are implemented on airplanes. I didn't originate
Now in Phobos there is std.concurrency.Generator. In Python they
added yield from for various reasons:
http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0380/
One of the reasons is performance:
Using a specialised syntax opens up possibilities for
optimisation when there is a long chain of generators.
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 12:31:15 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
It is not the same thing as ref/out buffer argument. We have
been running ping-pong comments about it for a several times
now. All std.internal.scopebuffer does is reducing heap
allocation count at cost of stack consumption (and
I see generators as being somewhat like opApply in terms of how
they're written. So a single generator would recurve across the
entire tree. Allocating a new generator per node isn't going to
be very efficient, even if we optimize for that case.
Am 01.11.2014 um 12:31 schrieb bearophile:
Third part of the A Programming Language for Games, by Jonathan Blow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTqZNujQOlA
Discussions:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2kxi89/jonathan_blow_a_programming_language_for_games/
His language seems to
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 15:32:22 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:48:33 UTC, Nicolas Sicard
wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:40:16 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 14:03:51 UTC, Nicolas Sicard
wrote:
What's the reason why the module
There is still a critical issue with std.experimental.logger that
would prevent it from being merged right now: The abuse of
@trusted all over the code.
For example, the following piece of code compiles with
burner/logger@c87e1032:
---
import std.experimental.logger.core;
struct Dangerous {
On 11/1/2014 5:31 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 07:02:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 10/30/2014 8:30 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
This is a typical mechanism that Tango used -- pass in a ref to a dynamic array
referencing a stack buffer. If it needed to grow, just
On 11/1/2014 10:04 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
Agreed. Its API also has severe safety problems.
Way overblown. And it's nothing that druntime developers cannot handle easily.
druntime is full of system programming.
Am Fri, 31 Oct 2014 13:16:15 +
schrieb eles e...@eles.com:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 at 10:06:51 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 at 09:58:41 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
if you have something concrete in mind, write ER or forum
post, so we can
On 11/1/2014 6:35 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
I'd say that I'd be nervous to see druntime chockers full of templates...?
What's a chocker?
Why would templates make you nervous? They're not C++ templates!
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 17:35:37 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
There is still a critical issue with std.experimental.logger
that would prevent it from being merged right now: The abuse of
@trusted all over the code.
For example, the following piece of code compiles with
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 16:22:33 UTC, Rainer Schuetze
wrote:
On 01.11.2014 14:25, Josh wrote:
I have Visual Studio 2012 and Windows SDK for Windows 8.1
installed. I
then used the DMD installer, which appears to have correctly
found them:
On 11/1/2014 4:31 AM, bearophile wrote:
His language seems to disallow comparisons of different types:
void main() {
int x = 10;
assert(x == 10.0); // Refused.
}
More than that, he disallows mixing different integer types, even if no
truncation would occur.
I like the part
On 11/1/2014 4:31 AM, bearophile wrote:
Third part of the A Programming Language for Games, by Jonathan Blow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTqZNujQOlA
Jonathan is reinventing D with a somewhat different syntax. Some points on the
video:
* The defer statement works pretty much exactly
bearophile wrote in message news:aghnzoieibfgivzxa...@forum.dlang.org...
What advantages gives removing that limitation?
Multi-module single-file test cases!
Is the price in increased complexity worth paying?
I doubt it.
Walter Bright:
* for over an array in D:
foreach (it; results) ...
D is better here, because it doesn't introduce magically named
variables.
* D does the check function thing using compile time function
execution to check template arguments.
This is not nearly enough. I have
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 17:17:34 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Another trend, which I find positive, is how many people are
now (finally!) assuming that C widespread into the industry was
after all not that good, in terms of bugs/line of code.
Now we need another 30 years until D, Rust,
On 11/1/2014 1:33 PM, bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
D is better here, because it doesn't introduce magically named variables.
I agree that the implicit variable is not good.
* D does the check function thing using compile time function execution to
check template arguments.
This is not
On 11/1/2014 6:31 AM, Dicebot wrote:
I am afraid you need to get used to it because it is fundamental design decision
of D module system and quite a feature on its own. Lot of files == awesome.
Cramming lots of code into one source file made abundant sense on floppy disk
systems, because
Am 01.11.2014 um 22:20 schrieb Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 17:17:34 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Another trend, which I find positive, is how many people are now
(finally!) assuming that C widespread into the industry was
On 11/1/2014 7:40 AM, Dicebot wrote:
I see no reason to put module declarations in single level projects with no
packages.
Sometimes it can be handy to have a module name different from a file name,
especially when trying to track down a bug, but this is rare.
Walter Bright:
I know you've suggested extensive data flow analysis,
The static enum (and related ideas) I've suggested require no
flow analysis.
Compile time checking can only be done on compile time
arguments (obviously) and template functions can arbitrarily
check compile time
Am 01.11.2014 um 23:23 schrieb Paulo Pinto:
Am 01.11.2014 um 22:20 schrieb Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 17:17:34 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Another trend, which I find positive, is how many people are now
(finally!)
Paulo Pinto:
- arrays were bound checked (just use a compiler flags and
dataflow to remove them like any sane language)
D removes very little bound checks. No data flow is used for this.
- enums were strong typed
D enums are only half strongly typed.
- had namespaces or real modules
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 19:10:15 +0100
Marco Leise via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
- reference counted object (doesn't exist in D)
but it exists! and with a size of machine pointer! i swear it exists,
i'm using it!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Am 01.11.2014 um 23:32 schrieb bearophile:
Paulo Pinto:
- arrays were bound checked (just use a compiler flags and dataflow to
remove them like any sane language)
D removes very little bound checks. No data flow is used for this.
- enums were strong typed
D enums are only half strongly
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 22:50:27 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
However JVM/.NET languages with a grain of C++ salt for
JNI/PInvoke, are what my employer and our customers care about,
so I can't justify to our customers any alternatives.
I don't think anyone would say that C/C++ would be
On Tuesday, 15 April 2014 at 13:59:31 UTC, Capture_A_Lag wrote:
I don't know what I have done, but everything works good now.
Thanks everybody for help!
Hi, Im having the same problem you had trying to run a d language
project...I keep getting the following error
Build started: Project:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 23:04:04 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
I see some clear benefits with browsers/javascript's ability to
compile directly to machine language on the fly. Just see what
the demo scene are doing with code generators. So yeah, the
code is slower, but perhaps not
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 17:35:37 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
There is still a critical issue with std.experimental.logger
that would prevent it from being merged right now: The abuse of
@trusted all over the code.
Thank you. I was afraid I'd have to harp on it for the fourth
time...
1 - 100 of 194 matches
Mail list logo
