Sun, 27 Dec 2009 03:47:23 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Georg Wrede:
- It has to be compiled to genuine executable code.
This is a very interesting topic, but I don't agree with some of your
ideas.
I think that today there are no languages really fit as first language.
Every language has
Mon, 04 Jan 2010 18:46:54 +0100, Daniel de Kok wrote:
On 2009-12-28 12:53:28 +0100, retard r...@tard.com.invalid said:
I'm not saying that everyone should learn Haskell, but I know it's
possible to learn stuff like Curry-Howard isomorphism, hylomorphisms,
monads, monad transformers, comonads
Thu, 13 May 2010 14:37:58 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
First, I hope this can be included, it looks like very solid code.
Second, if it cannot be included, I hope this does not dissuade you
from contributing to Phobos for other modules.
Basically, the next time
Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:04:01 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu
*sigh* The reason the compiler would have to create a temporary struct,
is because that's what a tuple is at runtime. Tuples need to be compact
(like structs) so that they can
Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:08:58 -0600, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
Axe. Looks like the only things it's good for are making code
undreadable and abusing for loop syntax to...
Make code unreadable.
When the heck would this be significantly more readable, safer, or more
concise than
Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:01:37 +0200, Yigal Chripun wrote:
I see what you're saying about two birds with one stone but from my POV
instead of replacing old cruft with a useful and friendly to use new
feature you just added more cruft and hacks to poorly support said
feature with unfriendly and
Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:22:24 -0500, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 05:00:56PM -0600, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
wrong. assignment has higher precedence than comma.
Oh, duh. And I use that fact in for loops all the time too...
change the first to
a = (b, c);
Right - this
Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:38:57 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
I agree, a tuple of one element (doesn't matter what type, array in
this case) should be semantically identical to that single element.
proper semantics for language supported tuples should IMO include: 1)
syntax to explicitly [de]construct
Wed, 18 Nov 2009 02:36:35 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Yigal Chripun yigal...@gmail.com
regarding unit type, it has by definition exactly one value, so a
function that is defined now in D to return void would return that
value and than it's perfectly legal to
Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:10:57 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
Didn't this used to work?
template factorial(int i) {
enum factorial = (i==0) ? 1 : i*factorial!(i-1);
}
With DMD 2.036 I'm getting:
Error: template instance factorial!(-495) recursive expansion
Seems like it expands both
Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:23:35 -0500, Robert Jacques wrote:
Also, all those well
known optimizations don't magically work for structs: I've seen modern
compilers do some pretty stupid things when structs and temporary values
are involved.
Are you talking about dmc/dmd now? Have you tried gcc 4.4
Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:31:11 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 3:16 AM, retard r...@tard.com.invalid wrote:
Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:10:57 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
Didn't this used to work?
template factorial(int i) {
enum factorial = (i==0) ? 1 : i*factorial!(i-1
Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:35:18 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The rewrite is done long after lexing, so no low-level problems there.
Oh, I thought it would let you introduce new operators. But it's only
about the existing ones.
I find the idea to
Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:38:25 -0500, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:01:10 -0500, Stewart Gordon smjg_1...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
snip
However, I imagine tuple(a++,b++) would have some overhead, which is
exactly what someone is trying to avoid by using custom for
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0200, Yigal Chripun wrote:
Ellery Newcomer wrote:
foo(a, b) is identical to foo(t);
does ML have any equivalent of template parameters? eg
foo!(1,int);
foo's signature is actually: `a - `a which is like doing in D: T foo(T)
(T n) { return n + n; } but
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:33:07 +0100, Simen kjaeraas wrote:
retard r...@tard.com.invalid wrote:
Does the new system allow overriding only some binary operations and
not all of them at once?
struct S {
S opBinary( string op )( S rhs ) if ( op == + ) {
// Do stuff
}
}
I
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:11:30 -0500, yigal chripun wrote:
retard Wrote:
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0200, Yigal Chripun wrote:
Ellery Newcomer wrote:
foo(a, b) is identical to foo(t);
does ML have any equivalent of template parameters? eg
foo!(1,int);
foo's signature
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 11:47:46 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
It seems to me that MS expects C++ to go the way of FORTRAN and
COBAL. Still there, still used, but by an increasingly small number of
people for a small (but important!) subset of things. Note how MS still
hasn't produced a C99 compiler.
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:26:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
aarti_pl wrote:
I know that quite a few people here doesn't like to allow users to
define their own operators, because it might obfuscate code. But it
doesn't have to be like this. Someone here already mentioned here that
it is not real
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:31:36 -0500, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 09:10:57PM +, retard wrote:
I expect most
of the every day apps to move to the cloud during the next 10 years.
Unfortunately c++ and d missed the train here.
D can do this. My D Windowing System project
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:27:34 -0700, Travis Boucher wrote:
Sean Kelly wrote:
Performance per watt is a huge issue for server farms, and until all
this talk of low power, short pipeline, massively parallel computing is
realized (ie. true cloud computing), systems languages will have a
very
Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:16:07 -0800, Michael Farnsworth wrote:
I love it when I hear people don't care about performance anymore,
because in my experience that couldn't be further from the truth. It
sorta reminds me of the Apple is dying argument that crops up every so
often. There will
Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:59:21 +, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article
Now that we have struct literals, the old C-style struct initializers
don't seem to be necessary.
The variations with named initializers are not really implemented --
the example in the spec
Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:06:44 -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
So, C-style arrays are gone, C-style struct initializers are gone,
C-style comma operator is gone, ... no, wait. I'm dreaming =P
It will never die. It's a perfect construct to be used in code generation.
Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:03:46 -0700, Travis Boucher wrote:
The future of D to me is very uncertain. I see some very bright
possibilities in the embedded area and the web cluster area (these are
my 2 areas, so I can't speak on the scientific applications). However
the limited targets for the
Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:49:21 +0200, Max Samukha wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:51:40 + (UTC), dsimcha dsim...@yahoo.com
wrote:
== Quote from Max Samukha (spam...@d-coding.com)'s article
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:30:48 -0800, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Yigal Chripun wrote:
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:18:05 -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 22 de noviembre a las 17:11 me escribiste:
Anyway, I think Chad's proposal has not been discussed here before
being implemented, which makes it more difficult to accept.
I think the exact opposite. It's much
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:37:27 -0500, bearophile wrote:
dsimcha:
I think D is about the
only language on the planet that cares about both scaling up to huge
million line applications and scaling down to small 500-line scripts.
Scala means scalable language, it's supposed to be designed to be
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:14:54 +, dsimcha wrote:
[snip]
as opposed to the
Java way of having to use 5 different classes just to read in a file
line by line in the default character encoding.
That's a library issue. Has nothing to do with the language.
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:21:41 +0300, Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:04:54 +0300, Pelle Månsson
pelle.mans...@gmail.com wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from retard (r...@tard.com.invalid)'s article
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:14:54 +, dsimcha wrote: [snip]
as opposed to the
Java way
Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:29:10 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Nick Sabalausky:
then attempting to evaluate
blahExpression at compile-time (which I believe it already does) and if
it succeeds, then treat it as a manifest constant in any place where
it's used (except for the places where it's pointer
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:22:26 +1300, Tim Matthews wrote:
In my opinion there should be one set of libraries (not limited to 2
layers) that is generalized enough to be used by any compiler, ide or
other tools for d too.
Not too long ago I noticed yet another I've made a d ide post. The
problem
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:58:23 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Sergey Gromov:
var slice []int = array[5:7];
Is []int better than int[] ?
[5:7] is a slice syntax a bit better than [5..7] (and it's used in
Python). But in D [5:7] is the literal for an AA...
You could change to syntax for AAs to
Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:32:21 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Making them not virtual would also make them not overridable, they'd all
be implicitly final.
Is there any compelling use case for virtual operator overloads? Keep in
mind that any non-virtual function can still be a wrapper for another
Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:16:33 -0500, bearophile wrote:
dsimcha:
but it would introduce an
inconsistency into the language relative to regular methods.
Right, it's an exception to a rule of the language, so it increases the
language complexity.
I guess the systems programming language users
Fri, 27 Nov 2009 14:10:34 +0100, Danny Wilson wrote:
Op Fri, 27 Nov 2009 11:58:59 +0100 schreef Don nos...@nospam.com:
void foo()
@naked body
{
LOL! Spam filters would love that!!
I can already imagine the jokes spreading over the internets:
@safe public double penetration(of a)
Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:59:27 -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 27 de noviembre a las 15:30 me escribiste:
One thing Java and Python, Ruby, etc., still hold over D is dynamic
classes, i.e. classes that are only known at runtime, not compile time.
In D, this:
I like the feature,
Hi
after using D1 and Tango for couple of years we decided to experiment
with D2 and Phobos in a small scale project. For some reason the mostly
flat package hierarchy seemed rather confusing.
For instance, it took two of us 15 minutes to build a program that reads
a line from user, converts
Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:36:24 -0500, Jason House wrote:
retard Wrote:
Hi
after using D1 and Tango for couple of years we decided to experiment
with D2 and Phobos in a small scale project. For some reason the mostly
flat package hierarchy seemed rather confusing.
For instance, it took two
Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:30:14 -0500, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 07:12:50PM +, retard wrote:
after using D1 and Tango for couple of years we decided to experiment
with D2 and Phobos in a small scale project. For some reason the mostly
flat package hierarchy seemed rather
Sun, 29 Nov 2009 20:26:07 +, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s
article
Walter and I discussed quite a few times the possibility of defining
std.all that publically imports all of std. My experiments show that a
short script importing
Mon, 30 Nov 2009 04:51:19 +, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Nick Sabalausky (a...@a.a)'s article
retard r...@tard.com.invalid wrote in message
news:heuh3h$o7...@digitalmars.com...
Hi
after using D1 and Tango for couple of years we decided to experiment
with D2 and Phobos in a small
Mon, 30 Nov 2009 04:55:29 +, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from retard (r...@tard.com.invalid)'s article
Hi
after using D1 and Tango for couple of years we decided to experiment
with D2 and Phobos in a small scale project. For some reason the mostly
flat package hierarchy seemed rather
Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:01:22 +0100, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
KennyTM~ wrote:
By
far the two most important pieces of I/O functionality I need are:
1. Read a text file line-by-line.
foreach (line; new Lines!(char) (new File (foobar.txt)))
Cout (line).newline;
}
yuck.
Yuck?? I find
Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:06:21 +0800, KennyTM~ wrote:
On Nov 30, 09 19:01, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
KennyTM~ wrote:
By
far the two most important pieces of I/O functionality I need are:
1. Read a text file line-by-line.
foreach (line; new Lines!(char) (new File (foobar.txt))) Cout
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 01:08:11 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
In Java, by going overboard on making the core language simple, you
end up pushing all the complexity into the APIs.
Yup, and that's the underlying problem with simple languages.
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:16:47 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Can you show examples of points 2, 3 and 4?
Have opDispatch look up the string in an associative array that returns
an associated delegate, then call the delegate.
The dynamic part will be loading up the
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:13:28 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
retard wrote:
Overall these simplifications don't remove any crucial high level
language features, in fact they make the code simpler and shorter. For
instance there isn't high level code that can only be written with
8-bit byte
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:30:43 +0300, Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:26:04 +0300, retard r...@tard.com.invalid wrote:
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:16:47 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Can you show examples of points 2, 3 and 4?
Have opDispatch look up the string
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:05:16 +0200, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
retard wrote:
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:16:47 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Can you show examples of points 2, 3 and 4?
Have opDispatch look up the string in an associative array that
returns
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:14:56 +0200, Max Samukha wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 11:45:14 + (UTC), retard r...@tard.com.invalid
Agreed. But this new feature is a bit confusing - there isn't anything
dynamic in it. It's more or less a compile time rewrite rule. It becomes
dynamic when all of that can
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:46:11 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
I really think the *only* *major* advantage of D over Python is speed.
That's it.
I probably place a lot more importance on static verification rather
than relying on convention and tons of unit tests.
In many
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:39:44 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
retard wrote:
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:16:47 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Can you show examples of points 2, 3 and 4?
Have opDispatch look up the string in an associative array that
returns an associated delegate
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:11:26 -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
And again, judging from experience, I don't know why, but I really have
a very small bug count when using Python. I don't work with huge teams
of crappy programmers (which I think is the scenario that D tries to
cover), that can be a
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:58:25 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Rainer Deyke:
open by itself is ambiguous. What are you opening? A window? A
network port? I think the word file needs to be in there somewhere
to disambiguate.
When you program in Python you remember that open is a built-in function
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:15:53 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
In Java, by going overboard on making the core language simple, you
end up pushing all the complexity into the APIs.
Yup, and that's the underlying problem with simple languages.
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:48:34 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:28:14 -0500, dsimcha dsim...@yahoo.com wrote:
== Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schvei...@yahoo.com)'s article
If the compiler could somehow
optimize out all instances of the template function to reduce
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:58:32 -0500, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 09:17:44PM +, retard wrote:
The lack of type annotations at least removes all typing bugs.
Quite the contrary, leaving off the type annotation spawns bugs.
It spawns new bugs, for sure, but it removes all
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:24:01 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
My biggest gripe about static verification is that it can't help you at
all with high-level logic/algorithmic errors, only lower level coding
errors. Good unit tests (and good asserts), on the other hand, are
invaluable
Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:38:29 +0100, Pelle Månsson wrote:
retard wrote:
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:58:25 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Rainer Deyke:
open by itself is ambiguous. What are you opening? A window? A
network port? I think the word file needs to be in there somewhere
to disambiguate.
When
Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:16:58 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
retard wrote:
The thing is, nowadays when all development should follow the
principles of clean code (book), agile, and tdd/bdd, this cannot
happen. You write tests first, then the production code. They say that
writing tests and code
Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:12:58 +0100, Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
std.conv.to() to the rescue! :)
import std.conv;
...
row[] a = sql_engine.execute(select * from foobar;).result;
int b = to!int(a[0][0]); // Throws if conversions fail
string c = to!string(a[0][1]);
Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:16:28 +, BCS wrote:
Hello Leandro,
Again *optimization*. How many times should I say that I agree that D
is better than almost every dynamic languages if you need speed?
I'm not arguing on that point. What I'm arguing is that (at least for
me) the primary
Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:48:14 +0100, Don wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 2 de diciembre a las 12:23 me escribiste:
l8night wrote:
Too many bugs - no way my superiors allow some program with that bug
list
Here's the gcc bug list with 5,442 open
Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:00:50 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
retard wrote:
Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:16:28 +, BCS wrote:
Hello Leandro,
Again *optimization*. How many times should I say that I agree that D
is better than almost every dynamic languages if you need speed?
I'm not arguing
Thu, 03 Dec 2009 21:35:14 +, BCS wrote:
Hello dsimcha,
== Quote from BCS (n...@anon.com)'s article
Show me ONE thing that can be done using run time meta programming
that can't
be done as well or better with run time, non-dynamic, non-meta and/or
compile
time meta. Unless I'm
Mon, 07 Dec 2009 13:17:10 +, Michal Minich wrote:
Hello bearophile,
Michal Minich:
But introduction { epx } as delegate/function literal for functions
with no arguments, which implicitly returns result of the expression,
seems to me as a good idea.
It's a special case, and special
Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:19:37 +0100, klickverbot wrote:
Denis Koroskin wrote:
Although I believe it is implementable and worth the trouble, there is
a little gain in this feature and that's probably why it is low in the
list. I think that Walter will give a green light if someone implements
the
Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:24:33 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Should we yank operator?
We can change it purpose and add the other one: rotate left
rotate right
Or some other user cases
a 1 // count the number of leading 1s
a 0 // count the number of trailing zeros
Those are
Fri, 27 Nov 2009 06:31:23 -0500, #ponce wrote:
I think that in the current design of safety, @trusted function and
normal functions are quite similar. An @unsafe proposal has been
rejected because of complexity.
But here is a case that is left.
Sometimes in D1, I found that a function I
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 01:02:04 +0100, Lutger wrote:
retard wrote:
...
You surely understand that Walter doesn't have enough time to change
this before the Andrei's book is out. So D2 won't be getting this.
Besides, he hasn't even said that he likes the syntax. And D can't
infer the types
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 12:08:43 +0900, Mike Parker wrote:
retard wrote:
Mon, 07 Dec 2009 04:06:14 -0500, Michiel Helvensteijn wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
What will removing it gain you?
Sancta simplicitas.
Hm.. I don't really buy that argument.
I see you and Walter removing/witholding
Sat, 05 Dec 2009 20:03:28 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
grauzone n...@example.net wrote in message
news:hfeu6p$1ap...@digitalmars.com...
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Ellery Newcomer ellery-newco...@utulsa.edu wrote in message
It's a useful divergence. It's a feature that should exist. But I
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:59:10 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:11 PM, hehe45 a3161...@uggsrock.com wrote:
I haven't been following the newgroup closely, so I don't know if this
has already been discussed, but I wanted to make a few suggestions
before D2 is finalized. I think the
Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:44:24 +0100, Lutger wrote:
retard wrote:
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:59:10 -0800, Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:11 PM, hehe45 a3161...@uggsrock.com wrote:
I haven't been following the newgroup closely, so I don't know if
this has already been discussed, but I
Sat, 12 Dec 2009 10:19:14 +0100, BLS wrote:
Guess you don't have to sell software :) we have to spend 2000$ a year
just for GUI Toolkits.
A colleague's company was previously using the expensive commercial Qt.
Now they use the lgpl licensed one and are still making money. They also
use
Sat, 12 Dec 2009 05:10:24 +, dsimcha wrote:
2. Native look and feel. IMHO this is very overrated. I've never
found that a Java-ish or GTK-ish or whatever look and feel instead of a
native Win32 look and feel got in the way of me using a program
effectively.
The win32 look and feel
Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:13:39 +, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from retard (r...@tard.com.invalid)'s article
Sat, 12 Dec 2009 05:10:24 +, dsimcha wrote:
2. Native look and feel. IMHO this is very overrated. I've never
found that a Java-ish or GTK-ish or whatever look and feel instead
Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:53:50 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
Right now we are working on a next QtD version. We dropped support for
D1, it is D2 only. I believe Qt suits all your requirements very well.
It's performant - we try to emulate as many C++ types using D
Sat, 12 Dec 2009 17:44:34 +, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from retard (r...@tard.com.invalid)'s article
Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:53:50 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
Right now we are working on a next QtD version. We dropped support
for D1, it is D2 only. I believe
Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:14:18 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
BLS windev...@hotmail.de wrote in message
news:hg0or1$2rt...@digitalmars.com...
On 12/12/2009 18:44, dsimcha wrote:
Because the Boost license doesn't require attribution for works only
distributed
in binary form.
All these kitchen
Sun, 13 Dec 2009 17:50:03 +0100, Chris wrote:
retard
IIRC if you use e.g. microsoft messenger, you have to defend them in
court if they insist.
Please, can you explain this, and where exactly this clause appear?
Thank you.
IIRC in the EULA of some previous version of the messenger
Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:15:04 -0500, Sean Kelly wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
I would suspect something else. I would expect actually that in an
allocation-heavy design, running on multiple cores should be at *least*
as fast as running on a single core. He also only has 2 cores. For
Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:42:26 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:25:11 -0500, S s...@s.com wrote:
Excuse me, because I haven't been active in the D community the last
year due to school concerns. However, I have been fiddling with the
language and on this newsgroups
Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:21:04 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
retard wrote:
Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:42:26 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:25:11 -0500, S s...@s.com wrote:
Excuse me, because I haven't been active in the D community the last
year due to school concerns
Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:51:10 -0500, Sean Kelly wrote:
bearophile Wrote:
This is a mostly boring rant against the Go language:
http://monoc.mo.funpic.de/go-rant/
Near the end it contains an interesting bit:
Too, why this divide, again, with reference types and value types? Did
they not
Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:16:05 +, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 15/12/09 22:25, MikeyMoose wrote:
Lionello Lunesu Wrote:
Is anybody else here experiencing problems with Thunderbird 3 RC? On
my laptop many post that are clearly replies to an existing thread
appear as new top-level posts.
I'm
Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:55:12 -0500, merlin wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
TDPL, currently counting 398 pages including a small index, has entered
editorial review this morning. The book draft includes everything
except the threading chapter. I've marked the personal record of
writing one
Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:24:50 +, Peter C. Chapin wrote:
retard r...@tard.com.invalid wrote in
news:hg8ppr$107...@digitalmars.com:
That's not the only problem in JVM. Languages are getting more and more
functional these days and many enterprise Java projects use ad-hoc
single method
Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:13:29 +0100, Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
Jonathan M Davis wrote:
The set of properties defined for foreach ranges in the online docs (
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/statement.html ) does not match those
of the ranges in std.range.
According to the online docs, foreach
Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:51:42 +, Isaac Gouy wrote:
merlin wrote:
do you think that D2 would be worth including at some point in the
future if we had some benchmark implementations showing off some of
it's more functional nature?
Last year I quadrupled what I have to do: by making
Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:37:19 +, Isaac Gouy wrote:
retard wrote:
-snip-
having the unofficial sources for languages not listed on the
benchmark pages available in the shootout repository would help one in
making his/hers own unofficial benchmarks
I'm probably misunderstanding your point
Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:50:52 +0200, Yigal Chripun wrote:
There's a whole range of designs for this and related issues and IMO the
C++ design is by far the worst of them all. not to mention the fact that
it isn't an orthogonal design (like many other features in c++). I'd
much prefer a true
Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:50:52 +0200, Yigal Chripun wrote:
There's a whole range of designs for this and related issues and IMO the
C++ design is by far the worst of them all. not to mention the fact that
it isn't an orthogonal design (like many other features in c++). I'd
much prefer a true
Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:53:33 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Yigal Chripun:
There's a whole range of designs for this and related issues and IMO
the C++ design is by far the worst of them all.
My creativity is probably limited, so I think that while C++/D templates
have some well known problems,
Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:43:35 +0100, Daniel de Kok wrote:
On 2009-12-17 13:58:44 +0100, retard r...@tard.com.invalid said:
Most likely they have will have to wrap lambdas inside some kind of
Function objects. I've read that even Scala would benefit from a more
functional friendly VM. But Sun's
Sat, 19 Dec 2009 00:24:50 +0200, Yigal Chripun wrote:
to retard:
different problems should be solved with different tools. Macros should
be used for meta-programming and generics for type-parameters. they
don't exclude each other. E.g. Nemerle has an awesome macro system yet
it also has .net
Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:42:27 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
bearophile wrote:
Please ask if you have missed my two points, because they must be
understood if you want to design a modern language.
I believe I do get it. After all, look at D's support for functional
programming (immutable and
Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:04:32 -0600, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
The Haskell folks really need to find a better canonical example.
Add to that the Erlang folk, too. I'm reading the book on Erlang by
Armstrong. Here's the Quicksort section and example on page 52:
Here's
Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:44:03 +0100, Don wrote:
downs wrote:
according to
http://www.mail-archive.com/haskell-cafe%40haskell.org/msg63381.html
I'll let this speak for itself.
import Data.Array.Base (unsafeRead, unsafeWrite)
[snip]
Brilliant.
What is so brilliant? Referential
1 - 100 of 599 matches
Mail list logo
