Thank you :)
On 1/25/2019 7:44 PM, Manu wrote:
I never said anything about 'rvalue references',
The DIP mentions them several times in the "forum threads" section. I see you
want to distinguish the DIP from that; I recommend a section clearing that up.
However, my points about the serious problems with
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 7:44 PM Manu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:00 AM Walter Bright via
> Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> >
> > The DIP should not invent its own syntax
>
> I removed it, and replaced it with simpler code (that I think is
> exception-correct) in my prior post here. It's
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:00 AM Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>
> On 1/24/2019 11:53 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
> > That the conflation of pass by reference to avoid copying and mutation is
> > not
> > only deliberate but also mitigated by @disable.
>
> The first oddity about
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 6:50 PM Neia Neutuladh via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:14:56 -0800, Manu wrote:
> > Removing the `void` stuff end expanding such that the declaration +
> > initialisation is at the appropriate moments; any function can throw
> > normally, and
On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:14:56 -0800, Manu wrote:
> Removing the `void` stuff end expanding such that the declaration +
> initialisation is at the appropriate moments; any function can throw
> normally, and the unwind works naturally?
The contention was that, if the arguments are constructed
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:20 PM Neia Neutuladh via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 23:08:52 +, kinke wrote:
>
> > On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 19:08:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> >> On 1/25/2019 2:57 AM, kinke wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 23:59:30 UTC,
On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 23:08:52 +, kinke wrote:
> On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 19:08:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 1/25/2019 2:57 AM, kinke wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 23:59:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/24/2019 1:03 PM, kinke wrote:
> (bool __gate = false;) ,
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 19:08:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/25/2019 2:57 AM, kinke wrote:
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 23:59:30 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 1/24/2019 1:03 PM, kinke wrote:
(bool __gate = false;) , ((A __pfx = a();)) , ((B __pfy =
b();)) , __gate = true , f(__pfx,
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 21:16:59 UTC, Ron Tarrant wrote:
Hi y'all,
As of January 11, 2019, http://gtkdcoding.com is up. It's a
blog, it's a github page, it's simple examples of how to use
GtkD for all that GUI stuff.
My approach is to lay out a firm foundation for both imperative
and
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 19:14:31 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 19:11:59 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Flipcause donors are not American. Did you have trouble? If
so, you can go to the donation page and use the PayPal link.
Sorry:
On Tuesday, 22 January 2019 at 19:53:10 UTC, Victor Porton wrote:
Now D supports semantic Web (RDF and SPARQL particularly):
I've created a D wrapper around C semantic Web library librdf.
Here is the code (it also supports several other programming
languages, particularly I did also Ada2012
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 19:11:59 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Did you have trouble?
No, the main problem is the person who usually lend his
International Card to me only have PayPal account, and I do not
want to bother him asking to register in the other options.
I'll go with PayPal later
Hi y'all,
As of January 11, 2019, http://gtkdcoding.com is up. It's a blog,
it's a github page, it's simple examples of how to use GtkD for
all that GUI stuff.
My approach is to lay out a firm foundation for both imperative
and object-oriented paradigms, then build from there, taking
PS: And let me know if you find any inaccuracies or if something
isn't clear.
On 26/01/2019 10:00 AM, Rubn wrote:
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 11:56:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/24/2019 11:53 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
That the conflation of pass by reference to avoid copying and
mutation is not only deliberate but also mitigated by @disable.
The first oddity
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 11:56:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/24/2019 11:53 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
That the conflation of pass by reference to avoid copying and
mutation is not only deliberate but also mitigated by @disable.
The first oddity about @disable is it is attached to the
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 19:11:59 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Flipcause donors are not American. Did you have trouble? If so,
you can go to the donation page and use the PayPal link.
Sorry:
https://dlang.org/foundation/donate.html
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 18:26:26 UTC, Matheus wrote:
...
Nice I'd like to help but I'm foreigner. It's possible to set a
PayPal account for this too?
They accept credit cards from around the world. Many of our
Flipcause donors are not American. Did you have trouble? If so,
you can
On 1/25/2019 2:57 AM, kinke wrote:
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 23:59:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/24/2019 1:03 PM, kinke wrote:
(bool __gate = false;) , ((A __pfx = a();)) , ((B __pfy = b();)) , __gate =
true , f(__pfx, __pfy);
There must be an individual gate for each of __pfx and
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 17:01:31 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
...
Nice I'd like to help but I'm foreigner. It's possible to set a
PayPal account for this too?
Matheus.
One of the options we were considering for a new fundraising
campaign was raising money for Vladimir's continuing efforts on
the forums. He's been maintaining them, and covering the server,
without any compensation since the beginning. The recent thread
about forum outages pushed all other
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 15:40:53 UTC, Radu wrote:
No GDC merged in GCC mentions? Should count as a big thing IMHO.
Ah, I forgot that when making the little list! (Most my attention
was actually on the dmd changelogs...)
but yeah that should have been there.
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 13:58:59 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I said in my annual D Blog retrospective that I wanted to do a
similar post focused on D at large. Sebastian Wilzbach sent me
a tremendously helpful info dump of all sorts of goings on,
most of which I knew nothing about. When I
On 1/25/19 5:57 AM, kinke wrote:
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 23:59:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/24/2019 1:03 PM, kinke wrote:
(bool __gate = false;) , ((A __pfx = a();)) , ((B __pfy = b();)) ,
__gate = true , f(__pfx, __pfy);
There must be an individual gate for each of __pfx and
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 11:56:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
All that criticism aside, I'd like to see rvalue references in
D. But the DIP needs significant work.
I haven't participated to writing this DIP, but I personally
appreciate this level of feedback.
I think it would have been
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 12:03:36 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 11:56:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
It should never have gotten this far without giving a precise
explanation of how exception safety is achieved when faced
with multiple parameters.
The pot
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 13:58:59 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I said in my annual D Blog retrospective that I wanted to do a
similar post focused on D at large. Sebastian Wilzbach sent me
a tremendously helpful info dump of all sorts of goings on,
most of which I knew nothing about. When I
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 11:56:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
It should never have gotten this far without giving a precise
explanation of how exception safety is achieved when faced with
multiple parameters.
The pot calling the kettle black. DIP1000? DIP1017?
Again, all that requires is
On 1/24/2019 11:53 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
That the conflation of pass by reference to avoid copying and mutation is not
only deliberate but also mitigated by @disable.
The first oddity about @disable is it is attached to the foo(int), not the
foo(ref int). If I wanted to know if foo(ref
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 21:17:24 UTC, viniarck wrote:
On Thursday, 17 January 2019 at 04:19:27 UTC, Brian wrote:
Google gRPC is A high performance, open-source universal RPC
framework.
[...]
Cool. Thanks for contributing. I look forward to using it in a
future project with
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 11:07:48 UTC, Jacob Shtokolov wrote:
This is where the precise GC might play a better role, BTW.
Misspelling: not precise, conservative GC of course.
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 10:15:15 UTC, Martin Tschierschke
wrote:
( On my wish list at the top: An official D database connector.
(MySql/MariaDB, Postgres, SQlite, MonetDB..) )
What about trying to find and to fund a maintainer for this
purpose?
(Next funding goal Mike Parker?)
I
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 23:59:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/24/2019 1:03 PM, kinke wrote:
(bool __gate = false;) , ((A __pfx = a();)) , ((B __pfy =
b();)) , __gate = true , f(__pfx, __pfy);
There must be an individual gate for each of __pfx and pfy.
With the rewrite above, if b()
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 23:02:07 UTC, Ben wrote:
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 14:44:07 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
Of course, one could argue that it must have offered enough to
keep some of them interested. They were able to get stuff done
when they used it.
The build in and good
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 07:33:02 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
No, it is not rejected in principle. Finding serious errors in
it on the eve of approval is disappointing, and is not
auspicious for being in a hurry to approve it.
For example, I spent a lot of time working on ARC, and was all
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 11:35 PM Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>
> No, it is not rejected in principle. Finding serious errors in it on the eve
> of
> approval is disappointing, and is not auspicious for being in a hurry to
> approve it.
I'm very clearly NOT in a hurry here.
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 13:58:59 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I said in my annual D Blog retrospective that I wanted to do a
similar post focused on D at large. Sebastian Wilzbach sent me
a tremendously helpful info dump of all sorts of goings on,
most of which I knew nothing about. When I
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 07:33:02 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
No, it is not rejected in principle.
Good.
Finding serious errors in it on the eve of approval is
disappointing,
and is not auspicious for being in a hurry to approve it.
Praytell, what serious errors? Also you should heed
39 matches
Mail list logo
