On 3/27/2015 12:34 PM, w0rp wrote:
Sean Parent's advice for no raw loops comes to mind.
https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/2013/Cpp-Seasoning With that rule,
basically a one-line body for foreach becomes acceptable.
This really is a great video. Which leads me to wonder why
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 18:39:34 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
yet current CPUs are still the same as 50 years before, that is the
problem. ;-)
I'd suggest that a Intel x86_64 of 2015 bears only a passing
relationship to an IBM 360 of the 1960s.
but core principles are
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 19:16:32 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
If you write your software to fit a particular platform,
including
hardware features, then you are writing an operating system
dedicated
to that one specific platform and no other.
Yes and I believe writing dedicated
On 2015-03-27 16:47, Mike Wey wrote:
On 03/27/2015 10:27 PM, captaindet wrote:
On 2015-03-26 17:41, Mike Wey wrote:
GtkD is a D binding and OO wrapper of Gtk+ and is released on the LGPL
license.
Shortly after the last release, GtkD has been updated for GTK+ 3.16.
GtkD 3.1.0 is now available
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:17:23 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
It is a pity that D is not pitching as a Python replacement.
D can't: it doesn't dumb enough to attract people that requires compiler
enforcements on whitespace to correctly format their code.
signature.asc
Am 28.03.2015 um 19:51 schrieb Walter Bright:
On 3/28/2015 8:41 AM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
Am 28.03.2015 um 15:33 schrieb Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce:
TLS is the evil here. Anyone working with TLS is either writing an
operating system or doing it wrong.
As long as we are talking
On 3/28/2015 3:20 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
Personally, I'm not sure that much is gained in pitting Go against D
precisely because they're so different that they're likely to appeal to
completely different sets of people.
I also do not regard Go as a competitor to
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 18:47:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/28/2015 3:20 AM, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
Personally, I'm not sure that much is gained in pitting Go
against D
precisely because they're so different that they're likely to
appeal to
completely
On 3/28/2015 8:41 AM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
Am 28.03.2015 um 15:33 schrieb Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce:
TLS is the evil here. Anyone working with TLS is either writing an
operating system or doing it wrong.
As long as we are talking about a closed system that works exclusively on
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 18:55 +, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[…]
I don't think it is that simple. From the purist academical
parallelism POV - most likely. In practice it often can be quite
the contrary, TLS is your best friend (depending on how efficient
platfrom
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 18:51 +, weaselcat via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 18:47:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/28/2015 3:20 AM, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
Personally, I'm not sure that much is gained in pitting Go
against D
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 20:35:07 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/27/2015 12:34 PM, w0rp wrote:
Sean Parent's advice for no raw loops comes to mind.
https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/2013/Cpp-Seasoning
With that rule,
basically a one-line body for foreach becomes acceptable.
Am 28.03.2015 um 21:51 schrieb Walter Bright:
On 3/28/2015 1:32 PM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
I/O is crucial of course, but there are also a lot of other important and
inherently impure things such as message passing.
If the message channel is passed as a parameter to the droutine, then
the
On 3/28/2015 3:24 PM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
If you ask me, they are very practical as they are - in fact much more practical
than if they could move between threads, not just because of purity or not. I'm
for example heavily using vibe.d's tasks for all kinds of UI, 3D graphics, sound
and physics
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 14:33:14 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 12:52 +0100, Sönke Ludwig via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[…]
You can access TLS from an event callback just as easy as from
a fiber.
[…]
TLS is the evil here. Anyone working with TLS is either writing
On 3/28/2015 2:01 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 20:35:07 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/27/2015 12:34 PM, w0rp wrote:
Sean Parent's advice for no raw loops comes to mind.
https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/2013/Cpp-Seasoning With that rule,
basically a
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 18:41:04 +, weaselcat wrote:
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 17:57:35 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:28:00 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
It could be argued that it is all just co-routines underneath,
but I think that would be missing
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 14:12:19 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 05:35:57 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 04:55:47 +, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
But honestly, there already exists so much information on how
to use
DustMite...
...that people in
On Sun, 29 Mar 2015 02:15:38 +, cym13 wrote:
On Sunday, 29 March 2015 at 00:24:36 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:17:23 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
It is a pity that D is not pitching as a Python replacement.
D can't: it doesn't dumb enough to
On 3/28/2015 1:32 PM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
I/O is crucial of course, but there are also a lot of other important and
inherently impure things such as message passing.
If the message channel is passed as a parameter to the droutine, then the
droutine can still be pure.
I think such a
On Fri, 2015-03-27 at 16:46 +, via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 22:41:01 UTC, Mike Wey wrote:
Shortly after the last release, GtkD has been updated for GTK+
3.16.
Thank you, that's awesome :)
Can't wait for my distro to get updated to start playing with
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 02:31:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
The data points we have suggest that the scarcity of D
programmers is an imaginary problem, because enterprises just
hire good people and they pick it up (ask Don at Sociomantic or
Dicebot for example). Modern business has a
Am 28.03.2015 um 10:17 schrieb Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com:
On Friday, 27 March 2015 at 16:48:26 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
1. No stack.
That reduces the memory footprint, but doesn't reduce latency.
It removes hard to spot dependencies on thread
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:27:55 +, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
In essence, you should ideally be able to break a task into all it's
independent parts and run them in parallel (i.e.. futures, events etc).
Preferably batch them to get better performance, and sort them based on
when they have
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 11:16 +, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[…]
hm. yes, that was coroutines on steroids.
But that's the point isn't it:
1. Processes are too heavyweight, invent threads.
2. We have masses of cores, let's map threads to cores via the kernel.
3. Processes and
On Fri, 2015-03-27 at 22:48 +, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[…]
the whole userspace threads concept is a reimplementation of
kernel
threads and sheduling. ;-)
And kernel threads are a reimplementation of user space threads.
--
Russel.
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 11:02:23 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Fri, 2015-03-27 at 22:48 +, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
[â¦]
the whole userspace threads concept is a reimplementation of kernel
threads and sheduling. ;-)
And kernel threads are a
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 13:27:56 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 27 March 2015 at 22:32:32 UTC, ketmar wrote:
but it is broken! the whole point of async i/o servers is that
Note: I presume that you meant servers and no OS-level async i/o
(the limitations of unix select() is
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 13:27 +, via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[…]
Nah. Cooperative multitasking is a sorry excuse that belongs to
the 80s. This should be as transparent as possible. You cannot
insert yield into an external library.
1960s.
Software developers have spent 50+ years
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 11:52:34 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
You can access TLS from an event callback just as easy as from
a fiber.
Yes, but it is much easier to verify that you don't hold onto
references to TLS if get rid of arbitrary call stacks when moving
to a new thread.
And why
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 05:35:57 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 04:55:47 +, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
But honestly, there already exists so much information on how
to use
DustMite...
...that people in bugzilla keep asking what it is.
Not knowing what something is and not
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 12:58 +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[…]
It does, and it should. In fact, I'd consider it massive selling
point for D if it were; you want easy Go-like concurrency? D has
that too. Right now, it's available easily for writing servers:
just use
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 12:52 +0100, Sönke Ludwig via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
[…]
You can access TLS from an event callback just as easy as from a
fiber.
[…]
TLS is the evil here. Anyone working with TLS is either writing an
operating system or doing it wrong.
--
Russel.
On Friday, 27 March 2015 at 04:24:52 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/26/2015 7:06 PM, weaselcat wrote:
vibe has (experimental?) green threads, doesn't it?
I don't keep up with vibe, so I may be wrong.
I don't know, but if it does have good 'uns they should be
moved into Phobos!
It does, and
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 13:52:54 UTC, ketmar wrote:
then you have to switch to some functional language, preferably
one that
does cps transformations in the compiler. as you told somewhere
else, D
is too broad to be restricted to this.
Fibers is really not a system level thing. So I
Am 28.03.2015 um 13:32 schrieb Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com:
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 11:52:34 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
You can access TLS from an event callback just as easy as from a fiber.
Yes, but it is much easier to verify that you don't
Am 28.03.2015 um 15:33 schrieb Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce:
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 12:52 +0100, Sönke Ludwig via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
[…]
You can access TLS from an event callback just as easy as from a
fiber.
[…]
TLS is the evil here. Anyone working with TLS is either
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:28:00 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
It could be argued that it is all just co-routines underneath, but I
think that would be missing the point that we have 55 years more
experience of doing these things since that single processor operating
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:12:17 +, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
Honestly, did you even try?
how do you think, where that 12 hours came from?
Do you think your time is more valuable than that of D contributors' or
something?
sure. main D developers shown that they have no respect for other's
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 17:57 +, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:28:00 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
It could be argued that it is all just co-routines underneath, but
I
think that would be missing the point that we have 55
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 17:57:35 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:28:00 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
It could be argued that it is all just co-routines underneath,
but I
think that would be missing the point that we have 55 years
more
experience of
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 18:39:47 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 17:57 +, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:28:00 +, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
It could be argued that it is all just co-routines
underneath, but
On Friday, 27 March 2015 at 16:48:26 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
1. No stack.
That reduces the memory footprint, but doesn't reduce latency.
It removes hard to spot dependencies on thread local storage.
2. Batching.
Can you elaborate?
Using fibers you deal with a single unit. Using events
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 04:36:18 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/26/2015 3:53 PM, ketmar wrote:
filling bugs like this huge project not compiling! is not
working, as
nobody wants to run dustmite on such projects, people just
waiting for
issue author to provide more information.
On Friday, March 27, 2015 16:03:01 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
On 3/27/2015 2:47 PM, weaselcat wrote:
On Friday, 27 March 2015 at 20:58:44 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/27/2015 1:35 PM, weaselcat wrote:
there's a difference between minimalism and blatantly not adopting
On 3/27/2015 11:06 PM, deadalnix wrote:
That being said I rarely face bugs in a single module. Usually bug arise in
situation like instantiate the a template from another template in another
module by passing an alias parameter from a symbol in a 3rd module.
I've noticed this problem with
On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 02:31:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
Fair points that I wouldn't argue with (although I think
predicting when one will finish something entirely new is a
mugs game - another reason to favour prototyping and rapid
iteration when possible).
Yet you have to if you
On Friday, 27 March 2015 at 16:44:50 UTC, Chris wrote:
I'd say Go fans are worse in this respect (yes, I know,
probably not all of them). People in the D community are here,
But that is just because there is more Go fans... ;)
48 matches
Mail list logo
