On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 14:28:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Daniel Nielsen put together a post describing the import idiom
that came to light in a recent forum discussion regarding DIP
1005 [3]. The relevant links are at [1] and [2].
[1] https://dlang.org/blog/2017/02/13/a-new-import
On Tuesday, 14 February 2017 at 23:01:42 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
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
Let's not make Phobos as scary as
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
>
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
Let's not make Phobos as scary as C++ STL.
---
Dmitry Olshansky
On Tuesday, 14 February 2017 at 02:32:33 UTC, 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?
Yes. +1
On Tuesday, 14 February 2017 at 02:32:33 UTC, Jerry wrote:
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 22:40:55 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 02/13/2017 06:28 AM, Mike Parker wrote:
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/5tt33y/a_new_import_idiom_for_d/
I claimed there is a performance improvement
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 22:40:55 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 02/13/2017 06:28 AM, Mike Parker wrote:
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/5tt33y/a_new_import_idiom_for_d/
I claimed there is a performance improvement in compilation.
Can someone answer kibwen's question on this
On 02/13/2017 06:28 AM, Mike Parker wrote:
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/5tt33y/a_new_import_idiom_for_d/
I claimed there is a performance improvement in compilation. Can someone
answer kibwen's question on this subthread please:
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 21:04:05 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 20:09:45 UTC, Daniel Nielsen
wrote:
I still suspect there will be a difference in real-world
applications even with LDC.
Why would you expect there to be a difference?
Module ctors/dtors are
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 20:09:45 UTC, Daniel Nielsen wrote:
I still suspect there will be a difference in real-world
applications even with LDC.
Why would you expect there to be a difference?
Module ctors/dtors are still pulled in, regardless of the import
being selective or not.
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 19:41:11 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
But for a full program, compile time is the same (it's really
short so you can't really conclude much from it), and binary
size as well (LDC 1.1.0, -O3). For my test cases below, the
binaries are identical, except for around 30
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 14:28:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Daniel Nielsen put together a post ...
[1] https://dlang.org/blog/2017/02/13/a-new-import-idiom/
I also liked the post, nicely written.
I didn't check, but if this idiom is not already tested in
dmd-testsuite, please add
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 15:04:53 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 15:00:24 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
With the Jack Stouffer comparison, wouldn't it be fairer to do:
import std.datetime : Systime;
import std.traits : isIntegral;
Probably, please help measuring your idea
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 14:28:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Daniel Nielsen put together a post
[1] https://dlang.org/blog/2017/02/13/a-new-import-idiom/
An entertaining read!
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 16:17:49 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
So I tried it again comparing all three versions on my machine.
This time I didn't notice a difference in compilation speed or
binary size between the version with
import std.datetime;
import std.traits;
and the one with
import
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 15:04:53 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
Probably, please help measuring your idea and post it here. I
intentionally chose a test made by someone else to avoid
biasing from my part. It was the only test I found at time of
writing.
The first time I did it, I got a ~60%
].
[1] https://dlang.org/blog/2017/02/13/a-new-import-idiom/
[2]
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/5tt33y/a_new_import_idiom_for_d/
[3]
https://forum.dlang.org/thread/tzqzmqhankrkbrfsr...@forum.dlang.org?page=1
A great post.
With the Jack Stouffer comparison, wouldn't it be fairer
On Monday, 13 February 2017 at 14:28:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Daniel Nielsen put together a post describing the import idiom
that came to light in a recent forum discussion regarding DIP
1005 [3]. The relevant links are at [1] and [2].
[1] https://dlang.org/blog/2017/02/13/a-new-import
Daniel Nielsen put together a post describing the import idiom
that came to light in a recent forum discussion regarding DIP
1005 [3]. The relevant links are at [1] and [2].
[1] https://dlang.org/blog/2017/02/13/a-new-import-idiom/
[2]
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/5tt33y
19 matches
Mail list logo
