On 9/18/2016 11:33 PM, Stefan Koch wrote:
However the maintenance burden is a bit heavy we don't have enough menpower as
it is.
A major part of the problem (that working with Optlink has made painfully clear)
is that although linking is conceptually a rather trivial task, the people
who've de
On Monday, 19 September 2016 at 05:16:37 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I'd love to design our own high speed formats, but then they'd
be incompatible with everybody else's.
I'd like that as well.
I recently had a look at the ELF and the COFF file formats both
are definitely in need of rework an
On 2016-09-19 07:16, Walter Bright wrote:
I'd love to design our own high speed formats, but then they'd be
incompatible with everybody else's.
You already mentioned in an other post [1] that the compiler could do
the linking as well. In that case you would need to write some form of
linker.
On 9/18/2016 7:05 PM, Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d wrote:
This is nice in the case of no changes, but problematic in the case of some
changes. The standard write new, rename technique never has either file in a
half-right state. The file is atomically either old or new and nothing in
between.
On 9/18/2016 8:20 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 09/18/2016 11:17 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Simplest case is - source file is being changed, therefore a new object
file is being produced, therefore a new executable is being produced.
Forgot to mention a situation here: if you change th
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 04:24:41 +1200, rikki cattermole wrote:
> On 19/09/2016 3:41 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 9/18/16 11:24 AM, rikki cattermole wrote:
>>> On 19/09/2016 3:20 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 09/18/2016 11:17 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Simplest case is - sou
On 9/18/2016 5:20 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Thanks. Well this kinda boils down to a tautology. I remember my wife asked me
once "what kind of insurance could protect us against anything"? There isn't one
(which is kinda terrifying first time you realize it). In the US, as an aside, I
don't t
On 9/18/2016 8:17 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
There is actually an even better way at the application level. Consider
a function in std.file:
updateS, Range)(S name, Range data);
updateFile does something interesting: it opens the file "name" for
reading AND writing, then r
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 20:11:56 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> Understood. I don't want anyone to get furious later on account of my
> sugarcoating things, so let me say this: I'm likely to oppose such a
> proposal. Walter and I have similar design sensibilities so he's like
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 09:26:50 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
In this post, I describe the software renderer available in
Dplug:
https://www.auburnsounds.com/blog/2016-09-16_PBR-for-Audio-Software-Interfaces.html
Looks good.
On 09/18/2016 07:46 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
So there's no easy option, and I am also not able to give investment
advice. But definitely worry about the return of your capital first,
and the return on it next rather than the other way around.
Thanks. Well this kinda boils down to a tautology
On 09/18/2016 04:29 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 08:14:47 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/18/16 6:00 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Yes. That's DIP 82:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP82
I need to go over it again and th
On Monday, September 19, 2016 01:55:58 Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 18.09.2016 22:10, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > In
> > this case, a non-static unittest block would be compiled into each
> > template
> > intsantiation, whereas a static one would be compiled once per t
See here on the rehypothecation risk of margin accounts. A
margin account allows your broker to lend your securities to the
street. If your broker should get into trouble, you are
potentially in a significantly worse position than if you held a
non margin account.
https://blog.wealthfro
On 18.09.2016 22:52, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 13:10:36 Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 08:02:47 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 9/17/16 5:23 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I think at some point s
On 18.09.2016 22:10, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 08:02:47 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 9/17/16 5:23 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> > I think at some point someone suggested we could implement explicit
> > support for such unittests
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 16:13:55 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 9/18/16 11:44 AM, jmh530 wrote:
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 12:39:25 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Thanks all for answering! Well there is a relatively low-risk
option
to make some 5%-7% annually by investing in
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 16:13:55 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Wouldn't that be risk from the unsecured personal lending
business, which although numerically similar has a different
dynamics?
In my head, I was imagining an efficient frontier and where a
5-7% return would get you
I would like to suggest that the existing DWT forum be renamed or
replaced with a more generic GUIs forum. As far as I can tell,
the DWT forum doesn't get much traffic these days and I don't
believe any of the current GUI options for D are sufficiently
popular to warrant their own specific foru
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 14:37:39 UTC, livefreetv01 wrote:
adsfhjsadfjhkadsfhjsadfjhk
ectndchlnhjftferhcvviccfcjgfhdgg
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 14:37:39 UTC, livefreetv01 wrote:
adsfhjsadfjhkadsfhjsadfjhk
Easy Choice:
https://tour.dlang.org/static/img/tour/dman.png
I think it would be best to speak to people from other
non-profit organizations (preferably ones that are very similar,
at least in spirit, to the D Language Foundation) about their
experience with such matters.
Even if the Foundation currently has no more cash than a typical
(or not so typ
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 13:10:36 Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 08:02:47 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
> wrote:
> > On 9/17/16 5:23 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> > > I think at some point someone suggested we could implement explicit
> >
> >
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 08:14:47 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 9/18/16 6:00 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > Yes. That's DIP 82:
> >
> > http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP82
> >
> > I need to go over it again and then introduce it into the new DIP process.
> > But
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 08:02:47 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 9/17/16 5:23 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> > I think at some point someone suggested we could implement explicit
> > support for such unittests via `static unittest`:
> That suggests the unittest shall be evalu
On 19/09/2016 3:41 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/18/16 11:24 AM, rikki cattermole wrote:
On 19/09/2016 3:20 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 09/18/2016 11:17 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Simplest case is - source file is being changed, therefore a new object
file is being produced, th
On 9/18/16 12:15 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
This will produce different behavior with hard links. With hard links,
the temporary file mechanism you mention will result in the old file
being accessible via the other path. With your recommended strategy, the
data accessible from both paths is updated.
This will produce different behavior with hard links. With hard links,
the temporary file mechanism you mention will result in the old file
being accessible via the other path. With your recommended strategy, the
data accessible from both paths is updated.
That's probably acceptable, and hard l
On 9/18/16 11:44 AM, jmh530 wrote:
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 12:39:25 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Thanks all for answering! Well there is a relatively low-risk option
to make some 5%-7% annually by investing in marketplace lending, see
https://lendingclub.com/. (Individuals may do the
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 12:39:25 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Thanks all for answering! Well there is a relatively low-risk
option to make some 5%-7% annually by investing in marketplace
lending, see https://lendingclub.com/. (Individuals may do the
same, too, btw - look into it!)
On 9/18/16 11:24 AM, rikki cattermole wrote:
On 19/09/2016 3:20 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 09/18/2016 11:17 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Simplest case is - source file is being changed, therefore a new object
file is being produced, therefore a new executable is being produced.
Forgo
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 15:17:31 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
There are quite a few situations in rdmd and dmd generally when
we compute a dependency structure over sets of files. Based on
that, we write new files that overwrite old, obsoleted files.
Those changes in turn trigger oth
On 19/09/2016 3:20 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 09/18/2016 11:17 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Simplest case is - source file is being changed, therefore a new object
file is being produced, therefore a new executable is being produced.
Forgot to mention a situation here: if you change t
On 09/18/2016 11:17 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Simplest case is - source file is being changed, therefore a new object
file is being produced, therefore a new executable is being produced.
Forgot to mention a situation here: if you change the source code of a
module without influencing the
There are quite a few situations in rdmd and dmd generally when we
compute a dependency structure over sets of files. Based on that, we
write new files that overwrite old, obsoleted files. Those changes in
turn trigger other dependencies to go stale so more building is done etc.
Simplest case
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 12:02:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
That suggests the unittest shall be evaluated during
compilation. -- Andrei
Nah, static is already quite overloaded and needs context to
understand what it does. For example module constructors.
Anyway compiler issues
On 09/18/2016 09:01 AM, John Colvin wrote:
What would be really good would be to have a way to make ddoc associate
a unittest with a particular symbol, regardless of location.
Though there are many ways in which we could be better, I really think
we're good.
See e.g. https://github.com/dlan
adsfhjsadfjhkadsfhjsadfjhk
Hi, all
It seems to me that a group of `Beta` should be removed, because
the last activity in this group dated November 30, 2015:
https://forum.dlang.org/post/565bc28c.8080...@dawg.eu
Group `Study` is also not very active, so it would be logical to
move it higher than it is situated now, or ot
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 12:02:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 9/17/16 5:23 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I think at some point someone suggested we could implement
explicit
support for such unittests via `static unittest`:
That suggests the unittest shall be evaluated during
compi
sd
On 9/18/16 7:16 AM, Mark wrote:
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 14:22:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The Foundation's cash os currently sitting in a checking account at
Bank of America. I've googled for things like "brokerage accounts for
non-profit" and figured that most or all deep disco
On 9/18/16 6:23 AM, Nick Treleaven wrote:
Besides the other comments, we still have to instantiate Awesome!int
somewhere for the tests to run, which could be forgotten or improperly
done, failing silently. (Also int is arbitrary, unhelpful for the
uninitiated).
I don't see that as much of a hur
On 9/18/16 6:00 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Yes. That's DIP 82:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP82
I need to go over it again and then introduce it into the new DIP process.
But I really think that that's where we should go to fix this problem.
Just a thought: things that we can't
On 9/17/16 5:23 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I think at some point someone suggested we could implement explicit
support for such unittests via `static unittest`:
That suggests the unittest shall be evaluated during compilation. -- Andrei
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 14:22:03 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
The Foundation's cash os currently sitting in a checking
account at Bank of America. I've googled for things like
"brokerage accounts for non-profit" and figured that most or
all deep discount brokers (Fidelity, Merrill,
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 at 11:10:22 UTC, ZombineDev wrote:
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 17:22:52 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
[...]
This solution is used extensively by ndslice [1] and I agree
that it's quite flexible.
[1]:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.166.1472923003.29
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 17:22:52 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Recall the discussion a few days ago about unittests inside
templates being instantiated with the template. Often that's
desirable, but sometimes not - for example when you want to
generate nice ddoc unittests and avoid
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 17:22:52 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
///
static if (is(T == int)) unittest
{
Awesome awesome;
awesome.awesome;
}
}
The unittest documentation is nicely generated. The unittest
code itself is only generated for one instantiati
On Saturday, September 17, 2016 21:23:58 Andrej Mitrovic via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 17:22:52 UTC, Andrei
>
> Alexandrescu wrote:
> > The unittest documentation is nicely generated. The unittest
> > code itself is only generated for one instantiation.
>
> I had a s
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 04:57:03 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
You should use Dscanner to do this, not DMD. DScanner does not
(or few) semantic, so just the module AST is necessary. It's
way faster.
I know this because I was doing something similar to build the
symbol list in Coedit 1 (u
51 matches
Mail list logo
