On Monday, 11 December 2023 at 08:24:55 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
On Sunday, 10 December 2023 at 22:59:06 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
Or you could use grep with `--output-ll` as noted by Johan
https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/4265#issuecomment-1376424944 although this will be with
On Monday, 11 December 2023 at 08:24:55 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
On Sunday, 10 December 2023 at 22:59:06 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
Always happy to help if you're interested in looking into
using dcompute.
Thank you, I'll let you know!
And please do get in touch with Bruce Carneal if you
On Sunday, 10 December 2023 at 16:08:45 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
On Sunday, 10 December 2023 at 15:31:55 UTC, Richard (Rikki)
Andrew Cattermole wrote:
It will be interesting to hear how dcompute will fare in your
situation, due to it being D code it should be an incremental
improvement
On Tuesday, 14 November 2023 at 08:18:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
## Editions
We had agreed in [the September monthly
meeting](https://forum.dlang.org/post/hetwfhikjqwzlvywm...@forum.dlang.org) the week before that we need to define what editions will look like before we start deciding which
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Yes, there have been improvements over the past few years. The
quarterly DLF meetings with industry representatives, initially
proposed by Nicholas Wilson, have been productive.
From memory that was merely an AGM at DConf, but sure,
On Tuesday, 11 April 2023 at 21:53:50 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
__Resolving disagreements__
Well that's disappointing. I guess DMD will just continue to
bleed contributors whenever Walter decides to do something that
the entire contributor base that is a very bad idea.
On Monday, 11 October 2021 at 15:07:59 UTC, Brian wrote:
Hi all --
I am in the process of getting a DMD package shipped in the
OpenBSD package repository.
If you are an OpenBSD user, please test and report back (on the
OpenBSD mailing list, please) how it went for you. The more
users test,
I'm happy to announce that I've managed to generate OpenGL
compute shaders from the OpenCL compilation pipeline. Through the
use of https://github.com/KhronosGroup/SPIRV-Cross the means that
we can generate GLSL, HLSL and MSL source
The setup and compilation steps is very janky at the moment
On Thursday, 27 February 2020 at 09:45:06 UTC, Rainer Schuetze
wrote:
On 27/02/2020 01:20, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/26/2020 3:13 AM, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote:
In all other languages with string interpolation that I'm
familiar with, `a` is not passed to the `i` parameter.
All rely on a
On Monday, 1 July 2019 at 09:24:31 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
The D Language Foundation is partnering with Symmetry
Investments for the second Symmetry Autumn of Code. I've
written up a blog post about it [1] and updated the SAoC page
[2] with the new details.
Potential mentors, please be sure
After getting waylaid by jet lag, family, health, and debugging,
I'm happy to finally announce v0.1 of dflat, a wrapping
application/library for .net dlls (e.g C#) to generate the
boilerplate needed to drive the CoreCLR (cross platform .Net
implementation).
This release features:
* cross
On Sunday, 16 June 2019 at 22:47:57 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Glad to announce the first beta for the 2.087.0 release, ♥ to
the 66 contributors.
http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta
http://dlang.org/changelog/2.087.0.html
As usual please report any bugs at
https://issues.dlang.org
On Wednesday, 12 June 2019 at 11:40:27 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, June 12, 2019 2:47:23 AM MDT Nicholas Wilson via
Digitalmars- d-announce wrote:
On Monday, 10 June 2019 at 13:49:27 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> DIP 1013, "The Deprecation Process", has been accepted.
On Monday, 10 June 2019 at 13:49:27 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1013, "The Deprecation Process", has been accepted.
...
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1013.md
So what is the "version" in @@@DEPRECATED_[version]@@@ supposed
to be? That still seems to be ambiguous.
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 at 09:41:18 UTC, Njagi Mwaniki wrote:
Hello I’m Njagi Mwaniki,
I am part of the 2019 Google Summer of Code under the Open
Bioinformatics Foundation with a project aimed to add variation
graph support to BioD under mentors George Githinji and Pjotr
Prins.
Awsome!
On Thursday, 16 May 2019 at 01:05:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Gah, so apparently .hashOf is a gigantic overload set of *21*
different overloads, so this is not really "truly" reduced. =-O
Anybody up for figuring out which overload(s) is/are getting
called?
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 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 Saturday, 27 April 2019 at 16:16:02 UTC, lempiji wrote:
Recently, I created a tool to create a module dependency graph
for the D language.
The tool can compare two versions and visualize the
differences. I think it's useful for source reviews.
Try it if you are interested.
Some
On Friday, 5 April 2019 at 15:52:42 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
Until we have copy ctors, D can't have structures with internal
pointers, as they can be moved... that's something similar in
C++ string, if I remember well, and that was the blocker that
leaded to the copy ctors DIP...
That
On Sunday, 17 March 2019 at 13:17:07 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
We're considering how to balance the different perspectives
on how the DIP process should work, but if any changes do come,
please don't expect them before DConf.
Indeed thats (part of) what the AGM is for. Please turn up and
have
On Monday, 11 March 2019 at 22:57:33 UTC, Olivier FAURE wrote:
On Thursday, 7 March 2019 at 14:24:29 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
The implementation supersedes the DIP.
I think the question a lot of people have in mind is "Is there
any plan to formally organize a discussion about the future of
On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 02:51:54 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 2/25/19 7:23 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
I've said before that that comparison is weak and not
particularly useful, irrespective of its intention.
That you've said it before does not make it any more correct.
You're
On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 00:23:19 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
On Monday, 25 February 2019 at 16:00:54 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
* etc. etc. etc.
That is a good start, though I suspect that the list is not
complete given the last item.
Oh, it keeps going.
On Monday, 25 February 2019 at 20:23:58 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 2/25/19 3:23 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2019-02-25 20:24, Mike Parker wrote:
From the process document:
“the DIP Manager or the Language Maintainers may allow for
exceptions which waive requirements or
On Monday, 25 February 2019 at 16:00:54 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 2/25/19 1:06 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
On Monday, 25 February 2019 at 02:56:13 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
Your DIP, and nobody else is going to do it, so it falls to
me.
It will be reviewed at Dconf, please make sure
On Monday, 25 February 2019 at 02:56:13 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Your DIP, and nobody else is going to do it, so it falls to me.
It will be reviewed at Dconf, please make sure you have an
_accurate_ summary of your criticisms of the DIP ready for then.
BTW, everyone should expect the DIP
On Sunday, 24 February 2019 at 21:22:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/24/2019 1:02 PM, Manu wrote:
I mean like, my DIP was almost violently rejected,
I thought it was clear what was needed to be done with it, and
I thought you were going to rewrite it. Was I mistaken?
Absolutely no, no.
On Tuesday, 19 February 2019 at 10:38:22 UTC, Robert Schadek
wrote:
FakeD [2,3] is a fake data generator with support for
localisation.
It is based on faker.js [1].
See [4] for a list of available methods.
void main() {
import std.stdio;
import faked;
auto f = new
On Friday, 8 February 2019 at 16:00:58 UTC, bitwise wrote:
On Monday, 4 February 2019 at 20:08:39 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Monday, 4 February 2019 at 18:35:37 UTC, bitwise wrote:
[...]
It's actually fine to leave the `return` there
unconditionally--you're allowed to return an expression
On Thursday, 31 January 2019 at 02:10:05 UTC, Manu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 1:05 PM Andrei Alexandrescu via
fun(my_short); // implicit type conversions (ie, short->int
promotion)
Oh I see.
fun(short(10)); // implicit type conversions (ie, short->int
promotion)
I did not
On Thursday, 31 January 2019 at 02:29:47 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
I came up with this idea based on tempCString, but it doesn't
work:
So I don't get why it doesn't work. But if that was fixed,
could be a potential workaround without requiring a DIP.
Thats nice! But it doesn't fix
On Tuesday, 29 January 2019 at 11:52:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
While writing this example:
int[] a = cast(int[]) alloc.allocate(100 * int.sizeof);
if (alloc.reallocate(a, 200 * int.sizeof))
{
assert(a.length == 200);
}
=>
int[] a = cast(int[]) alloc.allocate(100 *
On Tuesday, 29 January 2019 at 08:35:11 UTC, Manu wrote:
4. "Under DIP 1016, a call with any T[] will silently "succeed"
by
converting the slice to void[]" <-- Do you mean "... with any
T[] rvalue ..."? What would be the aim of that call? Can you
suggest a particularly sinister
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 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 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
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 07:02:47 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/24/2019 4:21 PM, Elie Morisse wrote:
I didn't see that coming and I'm deeply frustrated and
disappointed by this review and rejection.
On the contrary. It is good to find conceptual errors before
implementing it.
You
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 00:31:50 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 23:43:21 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
It's no problem if you want to rework the existing text, just
submit it as a new DIP.
And wait for another 180+ days for a fix? Come on dude, can you
understand
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 21:03:29 UTC, kinke wrote:
Describing this stuff in detail (rewritten expression?!), isn't
trivial and requires knowledge about how calls and
construction/destruction of argument expressions works.
E.g., the f() call in the code above is lowered to (-vcg-ast):
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 09:49:14 UTC, Manu wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 1:25 AM Nicholas Wilson via We
discussed and concluded that one mechanism to mitigate this
issue
was already readily available, and it's just that 'out' gains a
much
greater sense of identity (which is actually a
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 07:18:58 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Walter and Andrei have declined to accept DIP 1016, "ref T
accepts r-values", on the grounds that it has two fundamental
flaws that would open holes in the language. They are not
opposed to the feature in principle and suggested
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 07:18:58 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Walter and Andrei have declined to accept DIP 1016, "ref T
accepts r-values", on the grounds that it has two fundamental
flaws that would open holes in the language. They are not
opposed to the feature in principle and suggested
On Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 07:18:58 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Walter and Andrei have declined to accept DIP 1016, "ref T
accepts r-values", on the grounds that it has two fundamental
flaws that would open holes in the language. They are not
opposed to the feature in principle and suggested
On Wednesday, 16 January 2019 at 05:32:51 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 1/15/2019 10:39 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Perhaps we shouldn't support user defined types or functions
either ;)
You deliberately wrote that, and I'm confident you'd never try
to pass that off as good work.
With macros,
On Monday, 7 January 2019 at 13:35:31 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[string mixins make] it hard to debug (esp. if the codegen
isn't your own code) - (4) any compile errors are by necessity
obscure
because there isn't a concrete file and line number to refer to;
to get to the locus of the problem
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 at 18:54:25 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Simply repeating over and over again that you're not
"convinced" is not an argument, nor do your own personal
reasons above argue for one format over another.
I don't mean to stoke the flames on this anymore, but I do: I've
been to
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 at 05:01:43 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Monday, 24 December 2018 at 22:22:08 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
The 0.1% of the community that attend seem to like it, the vast
majority don't, or at least don't care.
You think we have 200k users? More to the point you
On Sunday, 23 December 2018 at 10:59:32 UTC, Joakim wrote:
You say that like some superior technology exists to replace
the conference.
It does, read the first link I gave in my first post above.
You mean the one that says "I don’t know how to fix conferences"?
Yes, DConf may benefit from
On Sunday, 23 December 2018 at 08:08:59 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Sunday, 23 December 2018 at 06:54:26 UTC, Russel Winder
wrote:
Others have cited Rust and Go. I shall cite Python, Ruby,
Groovy, Java, Kotlin, Clojure, Haskell, all of which have
thriving programming language oriented conferences
On Tuesday, 11 December 2018 at 10:45:39 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
A few things that have annoyed me about writing D lately:
https://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2018/12/11/what-d-got-wrong/
Nice!
I like the eponymous templates idea, though it might get
confusing with doubly nested
On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 at 08:02:21 UTC, M.M. wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 at 14:21:02 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Joakim interviewed Liran for the D Blog about their file
system, Matrix, and their use of D. Thanks to Joakim for
putting it together, and to Liran for taking the time to
On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 at 10:20:10 UTC, Martin Tschierschke
wrote:
p.s. And still: Please put the campaign logo/button beside the
general donation logo/button
at: https://dlang.org/foundation/donate.html
You could do a PR to
On Wednesday, 28 November 2018 at 12:48:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
I think that there are different strategies - decent appeal to
a broad market and having a very high appeal to a small market
(but there has better be something good about your potential
customer base ie 'D, if you find VBA
On Wednesday, 21 November 2018 at 11:58:25 UTC, Vladimir
Panteleev wrote:
Have we tried disabling -unittest for modules that aren't on
the compiler's command line yet (or, in case of -i, not
excluded)?
Not that I know of, thats a great idea!
Maybe this hack could be developed further into a
On Wednesday, 21 November 2018 at 08:07:52 UTC, Vladimir
Panteleev wrote:
https://blog.thecybershadow.net/2018/11/18/d-compilation-is-too-slow-and-i-am-forking-the-compiler/
This is #2 on HN at the moment.
On Wednesday, 21 November 2018 at 08:07:52 UTC, Vladimir
Panteleev wrote:
https://blog.thecybershadow.net/2018/11/18/d-compilation-is-too-slow-and-i-am-forking-the-compiler/
You gave me a fright there with the title there for a moment.
Awesome stuff though. Not sure how easy it will be to
On Sunday, 18 November 2018 at 04:38:57 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
Damn, you're right. Actually i didn't try your stuff at all and
instead used callgrind intuitively. Bad advice was here:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8945#issuecomment-439388332.
Also along the thread there was discussion about
On Wednesday, 14 November 2018 at 06:56:12 UTC, aliak wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 09:17:51 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
[...]
Ok, thanks!
[...]
Bummer. At least if this enum : int case is fixed that doesn't
seem like it's hard to work out in my head at least - but I
guess I'm
On Wednesday, 14 November 2018 at 04:33:23 UTC, Isaac S. wrote:
On Wednesday, 14 November 2018 at 04:27:05 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
There have been various attempts over the years to "fix"
various things in the D matching system by adding "just one
more" match level. I've rejected all of
On Wednesday, 14 November 2018 at 04:24:20 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Given how strong the negative response is to this and how
incomprenhensible a number of us find the reasoning behind how
bool functions in some scenarios, Walter probably does need to
sit back and think about this, but
On Wednesday, 14 November 2018 at 03:02:48 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 11/13/2018 3:50 PM, Isaac S. wrote:
is asinine and ignorant.
Some friendly advice - nobody is going to pay serious attention
to articles that sum up with such unprofessional statements.
Continuing the practice will just
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 10:05:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
I was hoping that this DIP was convincing enough, and its
failure is certainly disappointing.
Indeed.
On Sunday, 11 November 2018 at 11:29:03 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 16:09:12 UTC, Mike Parker
wrote:
I've just published a new blog post describing our new
fundraising campaign. TL;DR: We want to pay a Pull Request
Manager to thin out the pull request queues and
On Friday, 2 November 2018 at 00:12:29 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Glad to announce D 2.083.0, ♥ to the 51 contributors.
This release comes with betterC support in dub, new
CppRuntime_* version identifiers, an isZeroInit trait, and an
exported environment variable DUB_PACKAGE_VERSION during dub
On Wednesday, 31 October 2018 at 05:00:12 UTC, myCodeDontSmell
wrote:
I did find it confusing however, that you discuss leaky
abstractions, and putting your public interface at the
beginning of your code (and all the other crap below it)... but
then, in D, once your write your abstraction, say
On Tuesday, 30 October 2018 at 12:35:15 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Thanks! Yes, I'll port all of those over. I implemented most of
bindbc-al the other day. I plan to sit down and finish it up
later this week. Be forewarned though, my plans too frequently
have a mind of their own.
Mike could you
On Wednesday, 17 October 2018 at 15:18:43 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 October 2018 at 12:14:55 UTC, Martin Nowak
wrote:
Glad to announce the first beta for the 2.083.0 release, ♥ to
the 48 contributors for this release.
Thanks!
CppRuntime_* version identifiers -
On Monday, 15 October 2018 at 21:23:13 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I'm giving a presentation at:
http://nwcpp.org/
See you there!
Where'd you get your time machine from? I want one!
On Thursday, 11 October 2018 at 23:02:19 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Glad to announce D 2.082.1.
http://dlang.org/download.html
This point release fixes a few issues over 2.082.1
Ummm...
Anyway, thanks for the release!
On Monday, 8 October 2018 at 10:27:47 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
Both the DIP and the implementation still lack a -dip10xx
switch.
After discussing with Walter and Andrei we came to the
conclusion that a flag is not necessary in this case.
Please elaborate on the reasoning.
Immediately after the
On Monday, 8 October 2018 at 10:14:51 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2018 at 09:26:34 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
Hi all,
I just pushed another version of the DIP in which the major
modifications among otthers are removing implicit and use copy
constructor calls in all situations where a
On Sunday, 7 October 2018 at 10:14:08 UTC, Alexandru Ermicioi
wrote:
Hi Dlang community,
I'm announcing version 1.0.0 of Aedi dependency injection
framework.
[...]
Link?
On Saturday, 6 October 2018 at 00:02:36 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
So for now I definitely think the package route is a better
option.
Indeed.
But if you do end up using these bindings on DCompute please
let me know! I've made sure that all the Shader interfaces
exist, but if you find anything
On Thursday, 4 October 2018 at 04:03:27 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
On 04/10/2018 2:06 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
The Aurora DirectX bindings have been updated to support
Windows 10 1809. Also the D2D Effect Authoring SDK has been
added.
GitHub: https://github.com/auroragraphics/directx
DUB:
On Wednesday, 26 September 2018 at 22:57:47 UTC, Ali Çehreli
wrote:
Link at Meetup:
https://www.meetup.com/D-Lang-Silicon-Valley/events/slbvflyxmbkc/
Ali
Ah rats, this one is two weeks too early and the next one is a
week too late for me to go to while I'm in town for a conference.
On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 at 12:33:30 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
After discussing with Walter and Andrei we have decided that we
are going to drop @implicit for now as it may cause bugs (as
Jonathan has highlighted) and consider constructors that have
the form this(ref $q1 S rhs) $q2 as copy
On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 23:22:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
@implicit on copy constructors is outright bad. It would just
be a source of bugs. Every time that someone forgets to use it
(which plenty of programmers will forget, just like they forget
to use @safe, pure, nothrow, etc.),
On Sunday, 23 September 2018 at 01:08:50 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Saturday, September 22, 2018 6:13:25 PM MDT Adam D. Ruppe
via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[...]
Yeah, the problem has to do with how much you have to mark up
your code. Whether you have @foo @bar @baz or foo bar baz
On Wednesday, 19 September 2018 at 00:05:15 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 10:58:39 AM MDT aliak via
Digitalmars-d- announce wrote:
This will break compilation of current code that has an
explicit copy constructor, and the fix is simply to add the
attribute
On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 23:14:28 UTC, tide wrote:
From what I've read, the copy constructor can be used with
different types:
struct B
{
}
struct A
{
@implicit this(ref B b)
{
}
}
B foo();
A a;
a = foo(); // ok because of @implicit
a = A(foo()); // ok without @implicit
On Saturday, 15 September 2018 at 08:12:37 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On Sunday, 19 August 2018 at 23:49:21 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
On Sunday, 19 August 2018 at 20:33:45 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
[...]
Note that the D repl will only work on platforms where drepl
works i.e. platform
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 23:55:05 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
The bog-standard way of dealing with avoidable breakage with
DIPs is a -dip-10xx flag. In this case, if set, would prefer to
call copy constructors over blit + postblit.
Also adding @implicit is a backwards incompatible
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 23:36:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 5:17:44 PM MDT Nicholas Wilson
via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
it seems that even if we were to want to have @implicit as an
opposite of C++'s explicit it would _always_ be present
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 22:11:20 UTC, Manu wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 04:40, Dejan Lekic via
Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:22:55 UTC, rikki
cattermole wrote:
>
> Here is a question (that I don't think has been asked) why
> not
> @copy?
>
On Thursday, 6 September 2018 at 17:44:28 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Of course, what further complicates things here is that the
author is Walter, and ultimately, it's Walter and Andrei who
make the decision on their own. And if Walter doesn't respond
to any of the feedback or address it in
On Thursday, 6 September 2018 at 10:49:55 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I always ask DIP authors about unaddressed feedback before
moving from one stage to the other, and I did so with DIP 1017
when moving out of Draft Review. It's entirely up to the author
whether or not to address it and there is
On Thursday, 6 September 2018 at 09:41:39 UTC, Dukc wrote:
I disagree. Reviews are mainly for giving feedback, not for
deciding the fate of the DIP -that's what the formal assesment
is for.
For the draft review yes, but the points against the DIP were
raised in draft and it proceeded to
On Thursday, 6 September 2018 at 05:25:11 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I've got three DIPs in the Post-Community stage right now [2].
DIP 1015 will move to Final Review before yours if its author
is ready when I am, then yours will go before 1017.
I'm a bit worried about 1017 going in to final,
On Thursday, 6 September 2018 at 03:19:33 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I'm not going to start another Community Review until I get
some space in the latter end of the queue. But soon I'll be
asking for Draft Review feedback on the next candidate. Right
now that's likely to be 'Named arguments
On Monday, 20 August 2018 at 14:54:24 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I'm getting ready to start prepping one of the DIPs in the PR
queue for community review. It proposes adding an `in` operator
for arrays. I haven't gone through it in detail yet, so I
invite anyone with time on their hands to
On Sunday, 19 August 2018 at 20:33:45 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
Proof of concept works, but it requires some further
development to be useful to do work in.
https://github.com/kaleidicassociates/jupyterd
It uses D repl currently - this was written for a console
interface and probably you
On Monday, 6 August 2018 at 00:47:12 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
Sure https://github.com/thewilsonator/jupyterd
The echo interpreter now works, and the dmd one is there. I've
got no idea if it works because I'm on OSX (yay no shared library
support) if someone wants to test it that would be
On Sunday, 5 August 2018 at 20:01:22 UTC, Nikos wrote:
Thank you very much for your feedback. Unfortunately, none of
the above worked.
By the way, the reason I'm trying all this is to create a
Jupyter notebook. I've already made a simple version of it some
time ago
On Sunday, 5 August 2018 at 22:43:42 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
One benefit of D is as a better glue language that integrates
well with other languages and ecosystems. Many people who know
a bit about D have no idea that interop can work so easily or
well.
So it might be worth mentioning
On Sunday, 29 July 2018 at 18:14:31 UTC, Nikos wrote:
But when I try to export the whole dmdEngine
export:
auto engine(char[] txt) {
return interpreter(dmdEngine());
}
Can you export an instance of `interpreter(dmdEngine())`?
e.g.
__gshared auto dmdi =
On Saturday, 28 April 2018 at 14:30:14 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
New release of the strange D IDE not written in D and without
dark theme:
https://github.com/BBasile/Coedit/releases
Real change log is here:
https://github.com/BBasile/Coedit/releases/tag/v3.6.10
Every time you post a release I
On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 at 15:00:18 UTC, SimonN wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 at 14:13:55 UTC, Seb wrote:
Our next D Munich Meetup will coincide with DConf to give our
For those of you who stay at the hotel, we will be at the NH
München Messe hotel at 18:00 and lead you towards the
On Monday, 19 February 2018 at 10:49:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Glad to announce the first beta for the 2.079.0 release, ♥ to
the 77 contributors for this release.
http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta
http://dlang.org/changelog/2.079.0.html
As usual please report any bugs at
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
