Re: Article: Why Const Sucks

On Tuesday, March 06, 2018 09:36:43 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > Andrei has said before, and probably on more than one occasion, that if > he were to redesign ranges today, one of the things he would do > differently was to change the definition of forward range so that .save >

Re: Article: Why Const Sucks

On Tuesday, March 06, 2018 15:23:52 Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 03:21:47 UTC, Nick Sabalausky > > (Abscissa) wrote: > > Wait, seriously? Phobos frequently passes ranges by value? > > You *should* pass most ranges by value, just like how you should

Re: Release D 2.079.0

On Tuesday, March 06, 2018 05:34:39 psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 05:22:58 UTC, Void-995 wrote: > > Can somebody explain how [0] is more safe than array.ptr? > > Just want to understand why second statement isn't allowed in > > safe anymore. > >

Re: Article: Why Const Sucks

On Monday, March 05, 2018 22:21:47 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 03/05/2018 12:38 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > This broke the by-value > > assumption inherent in much of Phobos code, > > Wait, seriously? Phobos frequently passes ranges by value? I sincerely > hope that's

Re: Article: Why Const Sucks

On Monday, March 05, 2018 09:38:52 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > Eventually, I discovered > that the underlying problem was that Result, as defined above, was a > struct with a const member, and therefore it was illegal to assign it to > a variable of the same type outside of

Re: Article: Why Const Sucks

On Monday, March 05, 2018 17:35:28 ShadoLight via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > Very interesting and well written! Jonathan, your experiences > with const in C++/Java just about matches my experiences with it. > I also feel that the situation in D is less than ideal in this > regard. > > First,

Re: Article: Why Const Sucks

On Monday, March 05, 2018 11:38:05 Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > I used to use `immutable`, but gradually came around to only > using it if I have to send data to another thread, otherwise it's > too much of a hassle. Aside from the whole std.concurrency situation, I generally

Article: Why Const Sucks

Here's something I wrote up on const: http://jmdavisprog.com/articles/why-const-sucks.html I suppose that it's not exactly the most positive article, but I feel that it's accurate. - Jonathan M Davis

Re: State of D 2018 Survey

On Thursday, March 01, 2018 13:24:29 Bill Baxter via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > Just don't overlook the fact that people who fill out 30 minute surveys > right away after being told about them are a self-selected group of people > who apparently have way too much time on their hands. > Which

Re: State of D 2018 Survey

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 22:02:21 Manu via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 28 February 2018 at 05:41, Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-announce > > wrote: > > About a month ago, Sebastian Wilzbach sent an email out to a few of the > > core D folks

Re: State of D 2018 Survey

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 19:31:27 Cym13 via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > - some questions introduce clear bias as they don't have a clear > default exit path. Similarly, some of them seem to make the assumption that a problem makes it so that you don't want to use D (e.g. it talks

Re: State of D 2018 Survey

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 07:22:41 Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 13:41:56 Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d- > > announce wrote: > > About a month ago, Sebastian Wilzbach sent an email out to a few > > of th

Re: State of D 2018 Survey

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 13:41:56 Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > About a month ago, Sebastian Wilzbach sent an email out to a few > of the core D folks asking for feedback on a survey he had put > together. He thought it would be useful for the Foundation to use > in order

Re: Documentation for any* dub package, any version

On Tuesday, February 27, 2018 02:26:49 Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > But even you, who know how to use ddoc very well and have > obviously spent some time on it here, made trivial mistakes here > that just don't happen with adrdox. Any time you do something manually instead

Re: Documentation for any* dub package, any version

On Monday, February 26, 2018 17:53:23 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 06:43:55PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis via > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...] > > > Well, then basically, projects are going to need to decide to go with > > adrdox o

Re: Documentation for any* dub package, any version

On Monday, February 26, 2018 19:51:27 Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Monday, 26 February 2018 at 15:49:19 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > Yeah. Any project that uses .ddoc files to define additional > > macros isn't going to work properly > > It is actually more than

Re: Documentation for any* dub package, any version

On Monday, February 26, 2018 14:59:07 Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > It isn't 100% compatible with ddoc. For example, this > user-defined macro was not expanded: > http://dxml.dpldocs.info/dxml.dom.html#source Yeah. Any project that uses .ddoc files to define additional macros

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Friday, February 23, 2018 10:57:21 Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 10:48:10 UTC, psychoticRabbit > > wrote: > > If D just wants to become a compiled scripting language...good > > luck to it. > > That's certainly not the goal, but as with every

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Friday, February 23, 2018 10:08:58 Mike Franklin via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 09:18:33 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > > On 2018-02-19 11:49, Martin Nowak wrote: > >> Glad to announce the first beta for the 2.079.0 release, ♥ to > >> the 77 > >> contributors

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Friday, February 23, 2018 02:20:41 psychotyicRabbit via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > Also, D is pretty good a depracating stuff, so why not deprecate > the current way of imports, and gradually move to something (that > resolves issues): > > e.g. > > import std.stdio, std.whatever[this,

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Friday, February 23, 2018 00:05:59 Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > The main use-case for craming multiple imports into a line is not > libraries but scripting, examples, and maybe unit tests. > And indeed the changelog entry could have been a bit clearer and > easier to grasp.

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Thursday, February 22, 2018 10:30:44 psychoticRabboit via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Thursday, 22 February 2018 at 09:42:47 UTC, Atila Neves wrote: > > I'm going to a) never write these imports and b) pretend this > > feature doesn't exist. > > > > Atila > > what about something like

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Thursday, February 22, 2018 09:54:17 Uknown via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Thursday, 22 February 2018 at 09:48:20 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > On Thursday, February 22, 2018 09:42:47 Atila Neves via > > > > Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > >> On Tuesday, 20 February 2018 at

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Thursday, February 22, 2018 09:42:47 Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Tuesday, 20 February 2018 at 22:54:43 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:19:03PM +, John Gabriele via > > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...] > > > >> Thanks. Is the point to be able

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 18:10:51 rjframe via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 14:46:56 +, psychoticRabbit wrote: > > how on earth can anyone approve, that syntax like that, can become part > > of the D Programming language? > > > > I'm really bewildered. > > > >

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 10:24:41 Paolo Invernizzi via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 10:15:48 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 10:04:01 Kagamin via > > > > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > >> On Tuesday, 20 February

Re: Beta 2.079.0

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 10:04:01 Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Tuesday, 20 February 2018 at 22:54:43 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > Yeah, personally I'd avoid writing it that way too. > > There's no other way to use this feature though. Some of us think that it's a bad

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Thursday, February 15, 2018 01:55:28 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 14/02/2018 5:13 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 14:09:21 rikki cattermole via > > Digitalmars-d-> > > announce wrote: > >> On 14/02/2018 2:02 PM, Adrian Matoga wrote: >

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 14:09:21 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 14/02/2018 2:02 PM, Adrian Matoga wrote: > > On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 at 10:57:26 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: > >> See lines: > >> - Input!IR temp = input; > >> - input = temp; > >> > >>

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 10:14:44 Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > It looks like EntityRange requires forward range, is it ok for a > parser? It's very difficult in general to write a parser that isn't at least a forward range, because without that, you're stuck at only one

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 10:03:45 Patrick Schluter via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 22:00:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 13, 2018 21:18:12 Patrick Schluter via > > > > Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > >> [...] > > > > Well,

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Tuesday, February 13, 2018 14:29:27 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > Given the insane complexities of DTD that I'm only slowly beginning to > grasp from actually reading the spec, I'm quickly adopting the opinion > that dxml should remain as-is, and any DTD implementation should

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Tuesday, February 13, 2018 14:13:36 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > Great, just > great. Now I know why I've always had this gut feeling that > *something* is off about the whole XML mania.) Well, there are plenty of folks who talk like XML is a pile of steaming muck that

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Tuesday, February 13, 2018 21:18:12 Patrick Schluter via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > There's also the issue that entity references open a whole can of > worms concerning security. It quite possible to have an > exponential growing entity replacement that can take down any > parser. Well,

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Monday, February 12, 2018 21:53:21 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 02/12/2018 11:15 AM, rikki cattermole wrote: > > dxml 7.5k LOC > > std.xml 3k LOC > > > > dxml would make the situation a lot worse. > > 4.5k LOC == "a lot worse"? > > Uuuuhhh...WAT? There is sometimes

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Monday, February 12, 2018 21:26:45 Johannes Loher via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 05:36:51 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > dxml 0.2.0 has now been released. > > [...] > > Thank you very much for your efforts, I really appreciate it, as > I have been

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Monday, February 12, 2018 13:51:56 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > For example, entity > support pretty much means plain slices are no longer an option, because > you have to perform substitution of entity definitions, so you'll have > to either wrap it in some kind of lazy

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Monday, February 12, 2018 15:45:50 bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 15:43:59 UTC, bachmeier wrote: > > On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 14:04:38 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > > > wrote: > >> However, if folks as a whole think that Phobos' xml parser > >>

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Monday, February 12, 2018 15:26:24 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > All J.M.D. has to do to change this, is make the API match the spec (as > close as possible, without writing another parser) and separate out the > implementation into a different and very clear module

Re: dxml 0.2.0 released

On Monday, February 12, 2018 12:38:51 Chris via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 05:36:51 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > dxml 0.2.0 has now been released. > > > > I really wasn't planning on releasing anything this quickly > > after announcing dxml, but when I

dxml 0.2.0 released

dxml 0.2.0 has now been released. I really wasn't planning on releasing anything this quickly after announcing dxml, but when I went to start working on DOM support, it turned out to be surprisingly quick and easy to implement. So, dxml now has basic DOM support. As part of that, it became clear

Re: dxml 0.1.0 released

On Sunday, February 11, 2018 10:11:05 Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 13:47 -0800, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d- > > announce wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 02:15:33PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis via > > > > Digitalmars-d-a

Re: dxml 0.1.0 released

On Saturday, February 10, 2018 21:10:28 Joakim via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 18:57:53 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > On Saturday, February 10, 2018 16:14:41 Jacob Carlborg via > > > > Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > >> On 2018-02-09 22:15, Jonathan M

Re: dxml 0.1.0 released

On Saturday, February 10, 2018 19:53:48 Jesse Phillips via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 21:15:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > Hopefully, the documentation is clear enough, but obviously, > > I'm not the best judge of that. So, have at it. > > > >

Re: dxml 0.1.0 released

On Saturday, February 10, 2018 10:27:42 Stefan via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > great work, Jonathan. Thank you. > We were missing xml for a long time and did so many hacks just to > get xml somehow parsed. LOL. Actually, one of the helper functions in std.datetime.timezone that has to deal

Re: dxml 0.1.0 released

On Saturday, February 10, 2018 12:04:48 Seb via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 21:15:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > I have multiple projects that need an XML parser, and > > std_experimental_xml is clearly going nowhere, with the guy who > > wrote it having

Re: dxml 0.1.0 released

On Friday, February 09, 2018 13:47:52 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > As for DTDs, perhaps it might be enough to make normalize() configurable > with some way to specify additional entities that may be defined in the > DTD? Once that's possible, I'd say it's Good Enough(tm), since

dxml 0.1.0 released

I have multiple projects that need an XML parser, and std_experimental_xml is clearly going nowhere, with the guy who wrote it having disappeared into the ether, so I decided to break down and write one. I've kind of wanted to for years, but I didn't want to spend the time on it. However, sometime

Re: Article: Fuzzing D code with LDC

On Monday, January 15, 2018 09:49:24 Temtaime via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Saturday, 13 January 2018 at 23:59:52 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote: > > It's been a work-in-progress for half a year, but finished now: > > > > http://johanengelen.github.io/ldc/2018/01/14/Fuzzing-with-LDC.html > > >

Re: run.dlang.io - a modern way to run D code

On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 08:33:36 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 13/12/2017 8:11 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 08:04:19 rikki cattermole via > > Digitalmars-d-> > > announce wrote: > >> On 13/12/2017 7:56 AM, Jonathan M Davis

Re: run.dlang.io - a modern way to run D code

On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 06:53:02 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 13/12/2017 6:46 AM, bauss wrote: > > On Wednesday, 13 December 2017 at 01:14:26 UTC, Seb wrote: > >> On Wednesday, 13 December 2017 at 00:32:11 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: > >>> On 12/12/2017 6:37

[OT] Re: D User Survey

On Sunday, December 10, 2017 04:02:46 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 12/09/2017 07:58 AM, wobbles wrote: > > On Thursday, 7 December 2017 at 14:31:01 UTC, Chris wrote: > > I didn't know Ireland was so > > > >> unknown, unless, of course, I'm supposed to choose "Great

Re: Beta 2.077.1

On Sunday, November 26, 2017 03:30:27 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > Too late for RAII for betterC? :-( This is a point release, and adding RAII to betterC is a new feature. Normally, only bug fixes are supposed to go in point releases. - Jonathan M Davis

Re: Unit Testing in Action

On Tuesday, October 24, 2017 19:15:35 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 10/24/2017 3:06 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote: > > It would be very useful if the compiler could do that automatically. > > On 10/24/2017 2:58 PM, qznc wrote: > > The information is there just not expressed in a

Re: Release D v2.076.1

On Thursday, October 12, 2017 14:39:27 b4s1L3 via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > Also i'd like to say that the policy that is that regression > fixes are commited on stable and that the fact that they only > come to master in a "sync operation" is a problem. > > In the travis yaml we have to

Re: Silicon Valley D Meetup - September 28, 2017 - "Open Methods: From C++ to D" by Jean-Louis Leroy

On Saturday, September 30, 2017 15:30:48 Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 09/30/2017 01:34 PM, Mengu wrote: > > On Friday, 29 September 2017 at 21:06:56 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote: > >> The slides: > >> https://jll63.github.io/openmethods.d/dlang-meetup-2017-09-28/ > >> > >>

Re: Hong Kong dlang Meetup

On Tuesday, September 05, 2017 10:19:10 sarn via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 19:25:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > Several of us from the D community will be in Hong Kong on a > > business trip next week (me, John Colvin, Atila Neves, and Ilya > >

Re: Hong Kong dlang Meetup

On Tuesday, September 05, 2017 00:16:54 Nicholas Wilson via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 19:25:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > Several of us from the D community will be in Hong Kong on a > > business trip next week (me, John Colvin, Atila Neves, and Ilya

Hong Kong dlang Meetup

Several of us from the D community will be in Hong Kong on a business trip next week (me, John Colvin, Atila Neves, and Ilya Yaroshenko), and our client, Symmetry Investments[1], has offered to sponsor a dlang meetup. We haven't decided when exactly to meet up yet, but we're looking to meet up

Re: D as a Better C

On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 13:12:04 Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > To coincide with the improvements to -betterC in the upcoming DMD > 2.076, Walter has published a new article on the D blog about > what it is and why to use it. A fun read. And I'm personally > happy to see

Re: dub zsh completion

On Tuesday, August 22, 2017 22:35:53 Johannes Loher via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > I created a zsh completion script for dub. It is not perfect, but > it does many things well already. You can find it here: > https://github.com/ghost91-/dub-zsh-completion. > > I have seen that bash and fish

Re: Go Your Own Way (Part One: The Stack)

On Friday, July 7, 2017 1:48:47 PM MDT Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > I would add a note to the "static arrays are interchangeable with > dynamic arrays" saying that you can... and probably should > explicitly slice them with `[]`. > > The implicit slice is one of what I see as

Re: Compile-Time Sort in D

On Thursday, June 08, 2017 01:08:42 Jon Degenhardt via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > I was surprised as well, pleasantly of course. Using a simple > example may have helped. Personally, I'm not bothered by the > specific instances of negative feedback on Reddit. It's hard to > write a post that

Re: DIP 1003 (Remove body as a Keyword) Accepted!

On Sunday, June 04, 2017 05:56:15 Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Saturday, 3 June 2017 at 06:09:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > On Saturday, June 03, 2017 02:00:13 Jack Stouffer via > > > > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > >> I recommend a longer deprecation cycle than

Re: DIP 1003 (Remove body as a Keyword) Accepted!

On Saturday, June 03, 2017 17:16:52 Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 2017-06-02 16:17, Mike Parker wrote: > > Congratulations are in order for Jared Hanson. Walter and Andrei have > > approved his proposal to remove body as a keyword. I've added a summary > > of their

Re: DIP 1003 (Remove body as a Keyword) Accepted!

On Friday, June 02, 2017 23:44:21 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Sat, Jun 03, 2017 at 04:56:40AM +, MysticZach via > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...] > > > Yes, congratulations are in order. Although those of us who were > > questioning the need for any keyword at all in

Re: DIP 1003 (Remove body as a Keyword) Accepted!

On Saturday, June 03, 2017 02:00:13 Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > I recommend a longer deprecation cycle than usual for this, as > this will break many legacy libraries that don't get maintained > often. A period of two years sounds about right. For Phobos, that _is_ the

Re: D for Android beta

On Thursday, June 01, 2017 19:31:28 Joakim via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > The beta release of ldc 1.3, the llvm-based D compiler, is now > out: > > https://github.com/joakim-noah/android/releases > > It is accompanied by a non-trivial sample app from the Android > NDK, ported from C++ to

Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC

On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 09:07:16 ParticlePeter via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: > > On 5/30/2017 5:12 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote: > >> Ah, isn't English wonderful. I guess Walter is suffering the > >> inverse of the Calvin &

Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 19:23:42 Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: > > I fear the conversation will go like this, like it has for me: > > N: DCompute > > W: What's DCompute? > > N: Enables GPU programming with D > >

Re: Faster Command Line Tools in D

On Thursday, May 25, 2017 14:17:27 Suliman via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > std.string, std.array, and std.algorithm all have > > cross-polination when it comes to array operations. It has to > > do with the history of when the modules were introduced. > > Is there any plan to deprecate all

Re: Faster Command Line Tools in D

On Thursday, May 25, 2017 08:46:17 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > std.string, std.array, and std.algorithm all have cross-polination when > it comes to array operations. It has to do with the history of when the > modules were introduced. Not only that, but over time,

Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 08:11:21 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 5/16/2017 7:17 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: > > So again it is NOT color that bothers me. It is OVERUSE of color for > > stuff that isn't important to read the message which dilutes the > > meaning of color. It

Re: Libdivide ported to D

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 16:20:21 David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 15:30:19 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: > > On 5/14/2017 3:39 AM, Tomer Filiba wrote: > >> Of course it only applies to runtime division -- the compiler > >> can do the same if > >> the

Re: Cap'n Proto for D v0.1.2

On Tuesday, April 18, 2017 18:09:54 Thomas Brix Larsen via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > "Cap’n Proto is an insanely fast data interchange format and > capability-based RPC system. Think JSON, except binary. Or think > Protocol Buffers, except faster." > > This is the initial public release of

Re: "Competitive Advantage with D" is one of the keynotes at C++Now 2017

On Monday, April 10, 2017 23:08:16 Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > I will be presenting D as a time-saving tool at C++Now: > >http://cppnow.org/ > > I have to say it took me a very long time to come up with the title and > the abstract. How could I sell D to C++ experts?

Re: InfoWorld article on the open sourcing of dmd

On Monday, April 10, 2017 09:24:16 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > http://www.infoworld.com/article/3188427/application-development/free-at-l > ast-d-languages-official-compiler-is-open-source.html Hmmm. This article makes it sound like all of dmd was closed-source rather

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

On Friday, April 07, 2017 20:02:52 Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 19:37:14 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > From what I've seen, the fact that we use it so heavily in the > > D community is abnormal > > AFAIK the reasons it was chosen were > > 1. It's

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

On Friday, April 07, 2017 08:14:40 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 > > Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense > it. Thank you, Symantec! Well, this is certainly great news. Does this make dmd the only

Re: Need help

On Wednesday, March 15, 2017 12:24:14 Jack Applegame via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 at 11:09:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > I'm inclined to agree with David on this one, but I really > > don't want to argue about it. Just remember that this newsgroup > >

Re: Need help

On Wednesday, March 15, 2017 23:04:50 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > Oh relax, its a freelance job advertisement as well (payment for bug to > be fixed). If that wasn't there then yeah not appropriate. But its > there, so I say it was a good place :) I'm inclined to agree

Re: A New Import Idiom`

On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 00:01:42 Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 2/14/17 3:32 AM, Jerry wrote: > > Anyways yes this is kind of cool and fascinating how it works, but that > > aside I hope I never see this used in phobos. Does anyone else feel this > > way? > > +1 >

Re: Announcement: DConf 2017 Hackathon May 7

On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 13:17:02 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > I am happy to announce that there will be a special addition to this > year's DConf. > > The conference will not end after the three days of talks but > continue on into Sunday for a hackathon

Re: Vision document for H1 2017

On Friday, January 13, 2017 05:33:07 Chris Wright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 20:02:38 -0800, Jonathan M Davis via > > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > I don't see how it possibly could given how dynamic arrays work in D. It > > would h

Re: Vision document for H1 2017

On Thursday, January 12, 2017 21:57:37 Andrew Browne via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Wednesday, 4 January 2017 at 19:22:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu > > wrote: > > We release a brief Vision document summarizing the main goals > > we plan to pursue in the coming six months. This half we are

Re: Vision document for H1 2017

On Sunday, January 08, 2017 18:06:53 Brian via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Wednesday, 4 January 2017 at 19:22:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu > > wrote: > > We release a brief Vision document summarizing the main goals > > we plan to pursue in the coming six months. This half we are > >

Re: Vision document for H1 2017

On Thursday, January 05, 2017 04:43:12 Basile B. via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Wednesday, 4 January 2017 at 19:22:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu > > wrote: > > We release a brief Vision document summarizing the main goals > > we plan to pursue in the coming six months. This half we are > >

Re: Beta D 2.072.1-b1

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 09:55:00 Márcio Martins via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Monday, 28 November 2016 at 07:46:24 UTC, deadalnix wrote: > > On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 at 12:54:12 UTC, Martin Nowak > > > > wrote: > >> First beta for the 2.072.1 point release. > >> > >> This

Re: DIP 1003: remove `body` as a keyword

On Saturday, November 19, 2016 21:16:15 Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > DIP 1003 is merged to the queue and open for public informal > feedback. > > PR: https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/pull/48 > Initial merged document: > https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1003.md > > If

Re: Formal review of DIP1002

On Friday, November 18, 2016 12:10:53 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 11/18/16 11:09 AM, pineapple wrote: > > On Thursday, 17 November 2016 at 11:37:09 UTC, Dicebot wrote: > >> Disposition: REJECT. A proposal for a similar or identical feature > >> would need to be

Re: Release D 2.072.0

On Friday, November 11, 2016 14:36:59 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 11/11/2016 08:30 AM, Dicebot wrote: > > On Friday, 11 November 2016 at 13:21:40 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > >> Run the new dmd. If it fails, either fix your code or go temporarily > >> go back to the

Re: Release D 2.072.0

On Friday, November 04, 2016 00:45:18 Johan Engelen via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On Friday, 4 November 2016 at 00:42:48 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote: > > On Thursday, 3 November 2016 at 15:51:22 UTC, Steven > > > > Schveighoffer wrote: > >> Any cycles that are "newly discovered" were already

Re: Please say hello to Alexandru

On Tuesday, October 04, 2016 19:01:37 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > Hello everyone, > > > It is with great joy and honor to announce that Alexandru Razvan > Caciulescu will work with the D Language Foundation starting today. > Please join me in welcoming him to the

Re: On the future of DIP1000

On Sunday, August 21, 2016 21:52:59 John Colvin via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Sunday, 21 August 2016 at 21:46:56 UTC, John Colvin wrote: > > On Sunday, 21 August 2016 at 20:01:27 UTC, Dicebot wrote: > >> - scope is @safe only > > > > Why? I might have @system code that could still

Re: Sociomantic's short DConf2016 video

On Tuesday, May 24, 2016 11:06:45 Leandro Lucarella via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > For the ones that missed it (and the ones that didn't too), here > is a short video about the conference. > > https://vimeo.com/167235872 Well, I guess that that answers the question of what they were going

Re: D's Auto Decoding and You

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 09:05:53 Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Wednesday, 18 May 2016 at 20:10:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > So, while we do have enforcement of how ranges _can_ be used, > > we don't have enforcement of how they _are_ used, and I don't > > expect that

Re: D's Auto Decoding and You

On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 22:23:45 jmh530 via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Wednesday, 18 May 2016 at 20:10:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > At this point, if anyone ever calls front with parens, they're > > doing it wrong. > > Is this true of all @property functions? Should this be noted

Re: D's Auto Decoding and You

On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 17:36:44 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 08:19:48PM +, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On Tuesday, 17 May 2016 at 17:26:59 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > > >However, it's perfectly legal for a front

Re: Battle-plan for CTFE

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 07:06:59 maik klein via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > What is the current problem with ctfe? The biggest problem is that it uses up a _lot_ of memory and is generally slow. For instance, as I understand it, every time it mutates a variable, it actually allocates a

Re: Battle-plan for CTFE

On Monday, May 09, 2016 13:24:56 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 5/9/2016 9:57 AM, Stefan Koch wrote: > >[...] > > The memory consumption problem, at least, can be resolved by using stack > temporaries instead of allocating new nodes. This was already done in > constfold.d,

<    1   2   3   >