On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 12:32:59 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 22:33:09 UTC, Martin Nowak
wrote:
First beta for the 2.069.0 release.
http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta
http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html
Please report any bugs at
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 15:04:08 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 15:01:31 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 12:20:23 UTC, Andrea Fontana
wrote:
Are dmd 2.069b1 binaries compiled with dmd 2.069b1 or with
dmd 2.068.2?
The last released
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 22:33:09 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
First beta for the 2.069.0 release.
http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta
http://dlang.org/changelog/2.069.0.html
Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org
-Martin
I just noticed that you added the beta to the
On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 01:27:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Regardless, what we pretty much need to do with @property at
some point is make is that it's used to make it so that a
single pair of parens operate on the return value rather than
the function even if we don't do anything
On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 01:52:36 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
What would you use that for, a handwritten interface struct
with function pointers made read-only using @property?
var a = var.emptyObject; // works today
a.prop = { do_stuff; }; // works today
a.prop(); // useless no op
On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 02:31:51 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
nothing to warrant the invasive language feature @property is.
There's no reason for @property to be invasive. ALL it needs to
do is handle that one case, it shouldn't even be used anywhere
else. Everything else is trivial or
On Thursday, October 08, 2015 15:00:15 Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 12:48:48 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> > On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 04:14:59 UTC, extrawurst wrote:
> >> Does that mean @property has no effect anymore ?
> >
> > @property
On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 02:15:14 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 01:52:36 UTC, Martin Nowak
wrote:
What would you use that for, a handwritten interface struct
with function pointers made read-only using @property?
var a = var.emptyObject; // works today
On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 02:31:51 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
That's what I meant, weird use-case, at best it's a callback
better/setter.
I've never written such code, but even if you would, the 2
pairs of parens are only a tiny problem for generic code,
nothing to warrant the invasive
On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 01:52:36 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
To me the whole property discussion looks like one of those
endless debates about an insignificant detail.
Scala and Ruby seem to do well with sloppy parens.
Strict typing and explicitness has a real effect on code
legibility
On Friday, 9 October 2015 at 09:32:05 UTC, Joakim wrote:
downloads much? Maybe you should add a warning there, for
those who may not know the meaning of a beta.
If you're a coder you know what it means.
If you just started with programming probably it doesn't make any
difference :)
On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 14:10:43 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
On Friday, 2 October 2015 at 11:25:44 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Walter and I will travel to Brasov, Romania to hold an
evening-long event on the D language. There's been strong
interest in the event with over 300
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 07:25:36 UTC, Andrea Fontana wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 04:14:59 UTC, extrawurst wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 22:33:09 UTC, Martin Nowak
wrote:
[...]
`The -property switch has been deprecated.` Does that mean
@property has no effect
13 matches
Mail list logo
