On Saturday, 11 May 2019 at 07:53:36 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Anyone interested in the AGM can watch it at the following
link. You can leave feedback there, in IRC, or in Discord.
https://youtu.be/cpTAtiboIDs
Will there be a plan to revive the dip 1017 - add a Bottom type
and submit a
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 01:20:16PM +, Mike Franklin via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[...]
> If anyone's looking for a challenge, I welcome them to propose a new
> `Bool` type (note the capital B) for inclusion in my new library.
[...]
As long as && and || continue to evaluate to a 1-bit
On Sunday, 12 May 2019 at 10:58:49 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Bringing it up over and over again, like a perennial fight in a
marriage, with the hope of finally convincing the spouse on the
wrongness of their views - that all is wasted time.
There's a bunch of big rocks to move.
I take
On Sunday, 12 May 2019 at 14:50:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 5/12/19 1:34 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
However in this case the community consensus is that the chain
of reasoning you have used to arrive at your decision is wrong.
It's a simple enough matter to be understood, and
On Sunday, 12 May 2019 at 17:08:49 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
... snip ...
Fortunately, in the grand scheme of things, while this issue
does matter, it's still much smaller than almost all of the
issues that we have to worry about and consider having DIPs for.
Personally, I'm not at all
On Sunday, May 12, 2019 8:50:33 AM MDT Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-
d-announce wrote:
> On 5/12/19 1:34 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
> > However in this case the community consensus is that the chain of
> > reasoning you have used to arrive at your decision is wrong.
>
> It's a simple enough
On 5/12/19 1:34 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
However in this case the community consensus is that the chain of
reasoning you have used to arrive at your decision is wrong.
It's a simple enough matter to be understood, and reasonable to assume
Walter is not missing any important facts or
On Saturday, 11 May 2019 at 20:35:40 UTC, Exil wrote:
Sure it is convenient to have some properties of bool also be
similar to an integer, but it can definitely not be swapped in
to be used like a 1-bit integer and there are already plenty of
special rules for it.
Thanks for that analysis.
On Sunday, 12 May 2019 at 10:58:49 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Rejected D Improvement Proposals on small matters that D
language's leader thinks strongly about should allow everybody
to move on to larger, better things.
We are unable to, and should not be required to, provide
On 5/12/19 11:27 AM, Isaac S. wrote:
This is the crux of the argument: *How* does making bool an integer add
to the language?
The crux of the argument is there was a D Improvement Proposal on a
small language change, and it was rejected.
Rejected D Improvement Proposals on small matters
On Sunday, 12 May 2019 at 05:43:01 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/11/2019 7:27 PM, Mike Franklin wrote:
I understand. Every programmer, sooner or later, decides to
step up and take a swing at inventing boolean. (I have too -
did you know that D used to have a `bit` builtin type?)
Yes, D did
On 5/12/19 1:43 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/11/2019 7:27 PM, Mike Franklin wrote:
I think Walter is conflating how bool is stored in memory with its
semantics.
That's exactly what I'm deliberately doing.
I'm currently considering using D's rich modeling features to create a
new boolean
12 matches
Mail list logo
