On Thursday, 3 January 2013 at 08:25:41 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
wrote:
1/3/2013 12:22 PM, Russel Winder пишет:
On Wed, 2013-01-02 at 13:59 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
[…]
I finally threw in the towel and don't use Ubuntu to play
music anymore.
I threw in the towel on Ubuntu when Unity came
On Friday, 11 January 2013 at 06:37:31 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:22 PM, deadalnix wrote:
I have to concurs with Walter here.
I know that must be hard for you, and I admire your sacrifice!
:-)
Ha, we have disagreement, but remember, people always make more
noise when they
On 2013-01-10 06:18, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/9/2013 11:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
As I said, I don't know assembly but here's the output:
Good time to learn it!
Do you have any good books to recommend for this?
I will most likely not have time to learn assembly now. I'm busy with
On 1/10/2013 10:30 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-01-10 06:18, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/9/2013 11:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
As I said, I don't know assembly but here's the output:
Good time to learn it!
Do you have any good books to recommend for this?
No. But a reasonable way is
On 13-01-10 12:13 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/4/2013 12:10 PM, r_m_r wrote:
I was wondering if it is possible to integrate some javascript in the
changelog
page to automatically generate the list of fixed issues as suggested
by Jonathan
(As an example, please see the attached file: jq.html).
On 2013-01-10 21:13, Walter Bright wrote:
No. But a reasonable way is to just get the instruction set reference
from Intel, and single step some D code in assembler mode in the
debugger and go instruction by instruction.
I see, thanks.
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at how knowing
On 2013-01-11 05:22, deadalnix wrote:
I have to concurs with Walter here. Knowing assembly language is a great
way to improve you knowledge of programming in general. This is way
easier than what most dev think.
I personally know assembly for ARM and x86, and it is clearly helpful.
I have no
On 2013-01-07 09:04, Walter Bright wrote:
Please nail down what is necessary first. (BTW, I don't know how the
compiler can tell what image an address comes from. Remember, shared
libraries are loaded at runtime, not compile time.)
I've done some investigation. Currently DMD inserts a call to
On Friday, January 04, 2013 14:13:22 Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/3/2013 10:44 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
P.S. Also, as a future improvement, we _really_ shouldn't be linking to
bugzilla for our list. I've never seen a release notes document or
changelog do that in my entire life. It would be
On 1/9/13 12:43 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, January 04, 2013 14:13:22 Walter Bright wrote:
It's THE SAME LIST as in the bugzilla list. It's even in the same order.
It's just that the bugzilla generated list is complete.
I don't understand your rationale that it's _far_ more user
On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 16:25:10 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
So then what's this rvalue ref problem that's still on the front
burner?
auto ref / the problem that C++'s const deals with. The ability to have a
function which takes both lvalues and rvalues without copying them unless it
has to.
On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 00:52:32 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 1/9/13 12:43 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, January 04, 2013 14:13:22 Walter Bright wrote:
It's THE SAME LIST as in the bugzilla list. It's even in the same order.
It's just that the bugzilla generated list is
We have a solution for it with templated functions but
no solution for
non-templated functions.
We have: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1019
It's ready to merge. So maybe in 2.062 this problem is solved.
On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 07:57:12 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2013-01-07 09:04, Walter Bright wrote:
Please nail down what is necessary first. (BTW, I don't know
how the
compiler can tell what image an address comes from. Remember,
shared
libraries are loaded at runtime, not compile
On 2013-01-09 11:26, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I think it sounds like that but I don't know. I'm just trying to figure
out how TLS is implemented on Mac OS X 10.7+.
Also, there's nothing else that calls this tlv_get_addr function or the
thunk so I'm guessing it's the compiler that calls it.
--
On 2013-01-09 11:00, deadalnix wrote:
Isn't it horrible performancewise ?
I think it sounds like that but I don't know. I'm just trying to figure
out how TLS is implemented on Mac OS X 10.7+.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 1/9/2013 2:28 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-01-09 11:26, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I think it sounds like that but I don't know. I'm just trying to figure
out how TLS is implemented on Mac OS X 10.7+.
Also, there's nothing else that calls this tlv_get_addr function or the thunk so
I'm
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
There is something to be said about proportional response. Shall we stop this
now?
I propose to start another thread, maybe more constructive, where I
propose a small text describing what's new in 2.061.
On 2013-01-09 11:38, Walter Bright wrote:
Watcha do is something like this:
__thread int x;
int foo() { return x; }
Compile, disassemble, and look at the code generated and the fixup
records. Then there's no need to guess :-)
Sure, I've already done that. I compared one version using
On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 10:38:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Watcha do is something like this:
__thread int x;
int foo() { return x; }
Compile, disassemble, and look at the code generated and the
fixup records. Then there's no need to guess :-)
I also think this is the best way of
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 01:09:21 -0800
Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com wrote:
On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 00:52:32 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 1/9/13 12:43 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, January 04, 2013 14:13:22 Walter Bright wrote:
It's THE SAME LIST as in the bugzilla
On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 10:38:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/9/2013 2:28 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-01-09 11:26, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I think it sounds like that but I don't know. I'm just trying
to figure
out how TLS is implemented on Mac OS X 10.7+.
Also, there's
On 2013-01-09 19:53, John Colvin wrote:
Surely __thread is redundant there, seeing as x will be TLS by default?
We're talking C here and it's not default in C.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:54:54 -0500
Nick Sabalausky seewebsitetocontac...@semitwist.com wrote:
Yea, this change is definitely a notable step backwards in
presentation and usability.
And it doesn't help that, once again, the changelog is showing the
*next* release with no indication that it
On 2013-01-09 11:38, Walter Bright wrote:
Watcha do is something like this:
__thread int x;
int foo() { return x; }
Compile, disassemble, and look at the code generated and the fixup
records. Then there's no need to guess :-)
As I said, I don't know assembly but here's the output:
Original
On 1/4/2013 12:10 PM, r_m_r wrote:
I was wondering if it is possible to integrate some javascript in the changelog
page to automatically generate the list of fixed issues as suggested by Jonathan
(As an example, please see the attached file: jq.html).
Thanks for doing this. It's an
On 1/9/2013 11:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
As I said, I don't know assembly but here's the output:
Good time to learn it!
And I'm not kidding.
On Tuesday, 8 January 2013 at 07:30:55 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-01-07 21:30, David Nadlinger wrote:
I don't know the current relative market share of the
different OS X
versions on top of my head either, but as we were getting a
couple of
bug reports from people who had tried to use
On 1/7/2013 8:17 PM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
And now I understand that D1 is no longer officially supported. If I understand
properly D1 first release was 6 years ago. Lets assume I would have started a
product development with it say 2 years ago because it was deemed relatively
stable then. And
On 2013-01-08 09:57, Walter Bright wrote:
The moment D1 was stabilized, work began on D2. It was always understood
that D2 was the future, and D1 was the stable version. Supporting it for
6 years is a pretty long time in the software business.
At some point, you'll need to make a decision:
1.
On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 08:27 +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I'm running 10.7 on my white MacBook from 2006.
Interesting, I was told not to try upgrading to Lion, but to stay with
Snow Leopard.
MacBook2.1, Core 2 Duo, 2GB.
This has a 64-bit processor, but 32-bit boot PROM, which means OS X will
Looks like Apple are turning Snow Leopard 10.6 into their equivalent of
XP:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9233244/OS_X_Snow_Leopard_shows_signs_of_becoming_Apple_s_XP
From the list on http://www.apple.com/osx/how-to-upgrade/ I cannot
upgrade to Mountain Lion 10.8, and Apple provide no
Walter Bright, el 7 de January a las 13:27 me escribiste:
On 1/7/2013 11:40 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 7 de January a las 08:31 me escribiste:
One thing I want to do is enshrine a vetting mechanism that would
allow Walter and myself to pre-approve enhancement
Walter Bright, el 8 de January a las 00:57 me escribiste:
On 1/7/2013 8:17 PM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
And now I understand that D1 is no longer officially supported. If I
understand
properly D1 first release was 6 years ago. Lets assume I would have started
a
product development with it
Pierre Rouleau, el 7 de January a las 23:17 me escribiste:
I agree that feature releases mostly also contain bug fixes. I
should have said, and I was thinking about proposing a process where
minor releases that would only include bug fixes, and where major
releases would mainly introduce new
On 2013-01-08 13:52, Russel Winder wrote:
On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 08:27 +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Interesting, I was told not to try upgrading to Lion, but to stay with
Snow Leopard.
I just did.
MacBook2.1, Core 2 Duo, 2GB.
I think mine is from late 2006.
This has a 64-bit processor,
On 2013-01-08 14:05, Russel Winder wrote:
Looks like Apple are turning Snow Leopard 10.6 into their equivalent of
XP:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9233244/OS_X_Snow_Leopard_shows_signs_of_becoming_Apple_s_XP
From the list on http://www.apple.com/osx/how-to-upgrade/ I cannot
upgrade
On 2013-01-08 14:05, Russel Winder wrote:
Looks like Apple are turning Snow Leopard 10.6 into their equivalent of
XP:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9233244/OS_X_Snow_Leopard_shows_signs_of_becoming_Apple_s_XP
From the list on http://www.apple.com/osx/how-to-upgrade/ I cannot
upgrade
On 1/8/2013 4:34 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
What about licensing issues, is it even legal to for D1's backend? I mean, I
don't mind doing it personally, because I believe I won't have any problems.
But company lawyers don't think so positively :)
If you've got a licensing issue, talk to me
On 1/8/2013 4:52 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 08:27 +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I'm running 10.7 on my white MacBook from 2006.
Interesting, I was told not to try upgrading to Lion, but to stay with
Snow Leopard.
MacBook2.1, Core 2 Duo, 2GB.
This has a 64-bit processor,
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 07:11:30 +0100
deadalnix deadal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 January 2013 at 05:29:15 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:18:11 -0800
Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
On 1/7/2013 3:19 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013
On 2013-01-08 21:49, Walter Bright wrote:
So it won't run any 64 bit software?
It can run 64bit software just fine. Mac OS X has been able to do that
for a long time. 10.6 was the first version the kernel tries to run in
64bit mode (depends on the computer).
Just because the kernel
On 2013-01-07 13:41, David Nadlinger wrote:
Yes, it is not supported by linker and dyld versions shipping with OS X
10.7. This is also the reason why LDC 2 only supports OS X 10.7+, as
LLVM does not implement a workaround for older versions (although
implementing one up to the point where it is
On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 11:42:53 -0500
Nick Sabalausky seewebsitetocontac...@semitwist.com wrote:
Like browsers, for instance. When Microsoft had their browser merely
uninstallable...
Erm... s/uninstallable/non-uninstallable/ (unless I'm remembering
wrong)
On 2013-01-07 01:25, Walter Bright wrote:
Sean would be the main one, but really anyone who is willing to get down
and dirty with threads and such can do it.
Martin Nowak has already started on this, it seems he know what he's doing:
https://github.com/dawgfoto/druntime/tree/SharedRuntime
On 1/6/2013 11:57 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-01-07 01:25, Walter Bright wrote:
Sean would be the main one, but really anyone who is willing to get down
and dirty with threads and such can do it.
Martin Nowak has already started on this, it seems he know what he's doing:
On 1/6/2013 11:57 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-01-07 00:14, Walter Bright wrote:
Where it is not implemented is in druntime. The folks who work on
druntime are the ones that need convincing.
I didn't know you had stopped working on the runtime.
I now focus on the compiler, though I'll
On 1/6/2013 11:51 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-01-07 00:19, Walter Bright wrote:
I have fixed every single PIC implementation compiler problem that has
been brought to my attention. If there are others, I am not aware of
them. Please let me know the bugzilla issue numbers for any I have
On 2013-01-07 01:36, Walter Bright wrote:
The thing is, roadmaps are a lot like planning for a war. The moment the
first shot is fired, all the plans go out the window. What we need to
get done next is a constantly evolving situation, based on:
On occasion developer are asking what they can
On Sunday, 6 January 2013 at 23:19:48 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
DMD implements its own TLS on OS X because the OS X C compiler
says not implemented when you try to create TLS variables. I
had no other option.
Note that this no longer appears to be the case, at least with
clang (OS X 10.7.5):
On 2013-01-07 11:14, Robert Clipsham wrote:
Note that this no longer appears to be the case, at least with clang (OS
X 10.7.5):
Mac OS X Lion (10.7) got support for TLS. But that means that the whole
TLS needs to be redone in the compiler (output data to correct segments
and similar) and in
On Monday, 7 January 2013 at 10:14:54 UTC, Robert Clipsham wrote:
Though I believe it will probably fail with older OS X versions
which don't have TLS support.
Yes, it is not supported by linker and dyld versions shipping
with OS X 10.7. This is also the reason why LDC 2 only supports
OS X
On 01/06/2013 10:18 PM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
On 13-01-06 9:45 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, January 06, 2013 21:22:18 Pierre Rouleau wrote:
Is this something that the most influential people in the D project want
to fix?
What exactly do you want fixed?
Really, I would like to be
On 01/05/2013 03:01 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 08:20:19 -0500
Matthew Caron matt.ca...@redlion.net wrote:
On 01/02/2013 04:18 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
Why would you need to? If your mail store is IMAP, just let it
rebuild.
I don't store email on the server, I store it
On 13-01-07 7:49 AM, Matthew Caron wrote:
On 01/06/2013 10:18 PM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
On 13-01-06 9:45 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, January 06, 2013 21:22:18 Pierre Rouleau wrote:
Is this something that the most influential people in the D project
want
to fix?
What exactly do
On 2013-01-07 09:04, Walter Bright wrote:
Please nail down what is necessary first. (BTW, I don't know how the
compiler can tell what image an address comes from. Remember, shared
libraries are loaded at runtime, not compile time.)
I'll try and do that.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 01/07/2013 08:09 AM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
It would be nice to have bug fixes separated from new feature
introductions by having major and minor releases and branches for these
releases. Contributors of a release could backport bug fix in the
release they use if that was required by their
Brad Roberts, el 6 de January a las 17:28 me escribiste:
On 1/6/2013 4:25 PM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
I really hope at some point this will be addressed, and I think other
areas of the development process have been improved enough to think this
is a good moment to do so, but first
On 1/7/13 7:47 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
I can write a roadmap, but then, nobody will listen to me.
Walter can write a roadmap, nobody will listen to him.
One thing that few people know is that Walter and I have tried to kindly
convince people to work on specific things we believed were
On Monday, January 07, 2013 08:09:01 Pierre Rouleau wrote:
The worst part I see is that bug fixes and new feature introductions are
lumped together inside releases. Combined with the fact that the
development is not predictable means that if you develop products with D
you have to keep
On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 07:57:07 -0500
Matthew Caron matt.ca...@redlion.net wrote:
On 01/05/2013 03:01 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 08:20:19 -0500
Matthew Caron matt.ca...@redlion.net wrote:
On 01/02/2013 04:18 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
Why would you need to? If your mail
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 7 de January a las 08:31 me escribiste:
Why would I bother to do anything if is very likely that Walter don't want
to go that direction and all my work was done for nothing? Been there
before. Now I'm more cautious when selecting my battles.
One thing I want to do is
On 1/7/13 9:51 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 7 de January a las 08:31 me escribiste:
Why would I bother to do anything if is very likely that Walter don't want
to go that direction and all my work was done for nothing? Been there
before. Now I'm more cautious when
On 2013-01-07 19:29, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It's less structured than a roadmap but maybe that's what would make it
tenable!
It would be like a roadmap without the timeline. That's a lot better
than nothing.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 1/7/2013 4:41 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Monday, 7 January 2013 at 10:14:54 UTC, Robert Clipsham wrote:
Though I believe it will probably fail with older OS X versions which don't
have TLS support.
Yes, it is not supported by linker and dyld versions shipping with OS X 10.7.
This is
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 7 de January a las 08:31 me escribiste:
One thing I want to do is enshrine a vetting mechanism that would
allow Walter and myself to pre-approve enhancement requests.
Someone (including us) would submit an enhancement request to
Bugzilla, and then Walter and I add the
On 2013-01-07 20:54, Walter Bright wrote:
It's pretty clear where we'll be going with this. We'll be abandoning OS
X versions older than 10.7.
Would it be a bad idea and do what the dynamic linker does in the
druntime to support TLS? This would make it work on Mac OS X 10.6.
I don't know
On 1/7/2013 8:31 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Walter can write a roadmap, nobody will listen to him.
One thing that few people know is that Walter and I have tried to kindly
convince people to work on specific things we believed were important. Such
attempts have been largely unsuccessful.
Am Mon, 07 Jan 2013 19:39:52 +0100
schrieb Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com:
On 2013-01-07 19:29, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It's less structured than a roadmap but maybe that's what would
make it tenable!
It would be like a roadmap without the timeline. That's a lot better
than nothing.
On Monday, 7 January 2013 at 19:54:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/7/2013 4:41 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
Yes, it is not supported by linker and dyld versions shipping
with OS X 10.7.
Sorry, I wrote my last post in a hurry – I suppose it's clear
anyway, but that should have been »by the
On 1/7/2013 11:40 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 7 de January a las 08:31 me escribiste:
One thing I want to do is enshrine a vetting mechanism that would
allow Walter and myself to pre-approve enhancement requests.
Someone (including us) would submit an enhancement
On 1/7/2013 12:12 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-01-07 20:54, Walter Bright wrote:
It's pretty clear where we'll be going with this. We'll be abandoning OS
X versions older than 10.7.
Would it be a bad idea and do what the dynamic linker does in the druntime to
support TLS? This would
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 17:08:58 +0100
deadalnix deadal...@gmail.com wrote:
However, it is just to discover that this do not work :
struct Bar {}
auto foo(ref Bar bar) {}
foo(Bar()); // Now this is an error !
I still have code broken all over the place.
IIRC, they tried to include this
On 1/7/2013 3:19 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 17:08:58 +0100
deadalnix deadal...@gmail.com wrote:
However, it is just to discover that this do not work :
struct Bar {}
auto foo(ref Bar bar) {}
foo(Bar()); // Now this is an error !
I still have code broken all over the
On 1/7/13 12:39 PM, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Mon, 07 Jan 2013 19:39:52 +0100
schrieb Jacob Carlborgd...@me.com:
On 2013-01-07 19:29, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It's less structured than a roadmap but maybe that's what would
make it tenable!
It would be like a roadmap without the timeline.
On 13-01-07 9:12 AM, Matthew Caron wrote:
On 01/07/2013 08:09 AM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
It would be nice to have bug fixes separated from new feature
introductions by having major and minor releases and branches for these
releases. Contributors of a release could backport bug fix in the
On Monday, 7 January 2013 at 01:29:02 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote:
Does anyone know of any mechanism for getting people to do what
needs to be done vs what they want to do that doesn't
involve paying them? The only long term successes I can point
to all involve companies.
You cannot achieve this
On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:18:11 -0800
Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
On 1/7/2013 3:19 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 17:08:58 +0100
deadalnix deadal...@gmail.com wrote:
However, it is just to discover that this do not work :
struct Bar {}
auto foo(ref
On 2013-01-07 21:30, David Nadlinger wrote:
I don't know the current relative market share of the different OS X
versions on top of my head either, but as we were getting a couple of
bug reports from people who had tried to use LDC 2 on 10.6 (before we
figured out that LLVM doesn't emulate TLS
On 2013-01-06 05:19, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
I know.
What I'm trying to see is what is the development *plan* for D2?
Something that would identify the future features to be implemented and
the planned targets/milestones for them.
I would assume that I am not alone in watching the D language
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 12:08 +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
[…]
I've requested that for years, still nothing. Well that only thing I've
seen is that the change log used to say Under Construction: Shared
libraries for Linux. Still does for D1.
I know that the Go folk are of the view that shared
On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 12:57 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
[…]
That is a fair point. OTOH, Google (by their very nature) is dead-set on
things like making sure the web gets treated as an application platform
and getting people to store their personal data on Google's private
cloud (a moronic
On Sunday, 6 January 2013 at 04:19:53 UTC, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
I know.
What I'm trying to see is what is the development *plan* for
D2? Something that would identify the future features to be
implemented and the planned targets/milestones for them.
I would assume that I am not alone in
On 2013-01-06 12:27, Russel Winder wrote:
I know that the Go folk are of the view that shared libraries are an
abomination and all should be expunged from the universe; all Go
executables are statically linked.
Of course Linux, OS X, Solaris and AIX depend on shared libraries, but
maybe Google
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 12:56 +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
[…]
I completely agree. We _need_ dynamic libraries. But the problem is that
someone just have to do it and Walter doesn't seem to be in a rush to
implement it.
Is Walter the only person who can implement this? I cannot commit to
doing
On 2013-01-06 13:20, Russel Winder wrote:
Is Walter the only person who can implement this? I cannot commit to
doing anything on this in the foreseeable short-, to medium-term future,
but is there anyone who can?
No, absolutely not. But no one has been willing to do it yet. Martin
Nowak
On Sun, 06 Jan 2013 11:32:28 +
Russel Winder rus...@winder.org.uk wrote:
On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 12:57 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
[…]
Also I think another part of what makes Google (and Apple) so
dangerous is that unlike MS, most people are still hailing them as
wonderful and
Pierre Rouleau, el 5 de January a las 23:19 me escribiste:
On 13-01-05 4:01 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/5/2013 10:06 AM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
On 13-01-05 5:39 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/5/2013 1:30 AM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
I noticed that D 2.062 has no new features. What would it
Walter Bright, el 4 de January a las 10:58 me escribiste:
On 1/4/2013 6:02 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 3 de January a las 23:03 me escribiste:
On 1/3/2013 9:49 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
but other lines like
$(LI std.string: $(RED The implementations of
Pierre Rouleau, el 4 de January a las 11:59 me escribiste:
On 13-01-04 3:45 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/4/2013 12:16 AM, eles wrote:
Two concrete examples:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5992
is described in the list as: Phobos Win64 - D2 ; At least, change
its title
On 13-01-06 11:43 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Pierre Rouleau, el 5 de January a las 23:19 me escribiste:
On 13-01-05 4:01 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/5/2013 10:06 AM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
On 13-01-05 5:39 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/5/2013 1:30 AM, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
I noticed
On 13-01-06 11:40 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Pierre Rouleau, el 4 de January a las 11:59 me escribiste:
On 13-01-04 3:45 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/4/2013 12:16 AM, eles wrote:
Two concrete examples:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5992
is described in the list as:
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 11:42 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
[…]
Yea, I've noticed the same thing :( People are so enamored with their
iDevices, that they think Apple can do no wrong. At least that's the
only explanation I can think of.
Perhaps Apple employees visit everyone who buys an Apple
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Pierre Rouleau prouleau...@gmail.comwrote:
So, again, this is why I was asking whether you guys thought it would
be a good idea for me to start a discussion somewhere in one of the D
mailing lists, to gather the list of new features planned for the future
On 13-01-03 1:37 PM, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Thu, 03 Jan 2013 17:43:03 +0100
schrieb bearophile bearophileh...@lycos.com:
I agree. But we should probably start shipping minor releases.
+1
That would also enhance the visibility of the new language features in
major releases for the
On 13-01-06 2:52 PM, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Pierre Rouleau prouleau...@gmail.com
mailto:prouleau...@gmail.com wrote:
So, again, this is why I was asking whether you guys thought it
would be a good idea for me to start a discussion somewhere in one
of
The main newsgroup. Normally, D.announce should not contain this kind of
conversation. It's supposed to be a low-bandwidth list for announcing
projects and releases.
On 13-01-06 2:52 PM, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
As a token of goodwill, I'm willing to write a short text describing the
new release and plans for the next ones, except I don't even *know* what
the new release brought or what the next one will be.
I, for one, would be very interested. Even if
On 2013-01-06 16:20, Pierre Rouleau wrote:
Is there a file somewhere that lists all requested features, under
development features? Or the various mailing lists the only source of
information?
There is some information at the wiki, the DIP's.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Sun, 06 Jan 2013 19:25:48 +
Russel Winder rus...@winder.org.uk wrote:
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 11:42 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
[…]
Yea, I've noticed the same thing :( People are so enamored with
their iDevices, that they think Apple can do no wrong. At least
that's the only
1 - 100 of 323 matches
Mail list logo
