Re: Beta 2.073.0-b1
On Saturday, 7 January 2017 at 05:02:13 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: First beta for the 2.073.0 release. This release comes with a few phobos additions, a new -mcpu=avx switch, an experimental safety checks (-transition=safe/-dip1000), and several bugfixes. http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.073.0.html Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org -Martin DCD master doesn't build with this version. Try to build using make (and not DUB). You should get, at the end: [...] bin/dcd-server.o: dans la fonction « _Dmain »: msgpack-d/src/msgpack/value.d:(.text._Dmain+0xa38): référence indéfinie vers « _D4core4time12TickDuration25__T10opOpAssignVAyaa1_2bZ10opOpAssignMFNaNbNcNiNfS4core4time12TickDurationZS4core4time12TickDuration » collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status Error: linker exited with status 1 makefile:124: recipe for target 'dmdserver' failed make: *** [dmdserver] Error 1 I don't know what to think. With 2.072.2 no problem. This doesn't look like a standard regression since it happens during linking. Please someone test and confirm.
Re: SmartRef： The Smart Pointer In D
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 02:05:11 +, nbro wrote: > On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 16:50:37 UTC, Dsby wrote: >> I write the ref count pointer and the scoped point in D. it just Like >> cpp's shared_ptr ， waek_ptr and unique_ptr . >> Now, it is Developing. >> I will write more test before the frist release. >> And the docs is null. >> It on github: https://github.com/huntlabs/SmartRef > > What's would be the advantages of smart pointers in D? It's reference counting. Reference counting is like garbage collection, but deamortized. This is better for real-time applications. However, it adds overhead on every assignment and every variable going out of scope. In D, garbage collection is more expensive than it is in other languages, so the tradeoff is more attractive than it would be in other languages.
Re: SmartRef： The Smart Pointer In D
On Saturday, 14 January 2017 at 02:05:11 UTC, nbro wrote: On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 16:50:37 UTC, Dsby wrote: I write the ref count pointer and the scoped point in D. it just Like cpp's shared_ptr ， waek_ptr and unique_ptr . Now, it is Developing. I will write more test before the frist release. And the docs is null. It on github: https://github.com/huntlabs/SmartRef What's would be the advantages of smart pointers in D? Simple, Same Advantages you would get with C++ smart pointers.
Re: Beta 2.073.0-b1
On Saturday, 7 January 2017 at 05:02:13 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: First beta for the 2.073.0 release. This release comes with a few phobos additions, a new -mcpu=avx switch, an experimental safety checks (-transition=safe/-dip1000), and several bugfixes. http://dlang.org/download.html#dmd_beta http://dlang.org/changelog/2.073.0.html Please report any bugs at https://issues.dlang.org -Martin Is it possible to get an ETA on protection work on __traits? Thanks
Re: SmartRef： The Smart Pointer In D
On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 16:50:37 UTC, Dsby wrote: I write the ref count pointer and the scoped point in D. it just Like cpp's shared_ptr ， waek_ptr and unique_ptr . Now, it is Developing. I will write more test before the frist release. And the docs is null. It on github: https://github.com/huntlabs/SmartRef What's would be the advantages of smart pointers in D?
SmartRef： The Smart Pointer In D
I write the ref count pointer and the scoped point in D. it just Like cpp's shared_ptr ， waek_ptr and unique_ptr . Now, it is Developing. I will write more test before the frist release. And the docs is null. It on github: https://github.com/huntlabs/SmartRef
Software Engineer at LinkedIn praises D
That is nice to read, Brian Geffon - Senior Staff Software Engineer at LinkedIn - wrote: Over the years I've always followed D because of the team working on it and the potential of the language. After playing more today I have to say D is rapidly becoming the perfect language, IMO far superior than Go or Rust. Andrei Alexandrescu and team have done an amazing job getting D to where it is today, I'm hoping that it gains more adoption so I'll get more opportunities to play Whoever has an Account there can like the Post here: www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6224912211941298176 Cheers, Stephan
Re: GSoC 2016 Postmortem
On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 13:12:19 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Craig Dillabaugh is ramping up for Google Summer of Code 2017. He took some time out to give a report on GSoC 2016 and recommendations for how to improve the process this year. Blog: https://dlang.org/blog/2017/01/13/the-d-language-foundation-google-summer-of-code-2016-postmortem/ Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/d_language/comments/5nqi54/the_d_language_foundation_google_summer_of_code/ Thanks Mike for getting this posted. Just noticed info on the 2017 GSoC has been posted now. Time to get back to work. https://developers.google.com/open-source/gsoc/ Note that the 2017 Ideas page has been set up, its a little light on content at the moment: https://wiki.dlang.org/GSOC_2017_Ideas
GSoC 2016 Postmortem
Craig Dillabaugh is ramping up for Google Summer of Code 2017. He took some time out to give a report on GSoC 2016 and recommendations for how to improve the process this year. Blog: https://dlang.org/blog/2017/01/13/the-d-language-foundation-google-summer-of-code-2016-postmortem/ Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/d_language/comments/5nqi54/the_d_language_foundation_google_summer_of_code/
Re: Vision document for H1 2017
On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 12:53:16 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote: On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 05:33:07 UTC, Chris Wright wrote: On that topic, D's arrays would play nicer with both refcounting *and* modern garbage collectors if they were structured as base, offset, length instead of start, length. That might be slower sometimes as slices wouldn't fit in two registers then. Although for custom data structures, offset & length could often share one register. Then the magic looking up of the base address can be avoided, saving time.
Re: Vision document for H1 2017
On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 05:33:07 UTC, Chris Wright wrote: On that topic, D's arrays would play nicer with both refcounting *and* modern garbage collectors if they were structured as base, offset, length instead of start, length. That might be slower sometimes as slices wouldn't fit in two registers then. You could put metadata just before the start of the array, including the reference count. Yes, but GC arrays already do that with GC metadata (alloc size) without having offset, so that technique could in theory be done with RC too. It's a bit mysterious how the base address is found, would be nice to have some clear docs on this to point to.
Voting for std.experimental.checkedint
http://forum.dlang.org/post/wgsguzbgrcejptuxf...@forum.dlang.org
Re: Vision document for H1 2017
On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 05:33:07 UTC, Chris Wright 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 have to have some sort of reference counting mechanism, which would likely be a nightmare with slicing On that topic, D's arrays would play nicer with both refcounting *and* modern garbage collectors if they were structured as base, offset, length instead of start, length. You could put metadata just before the start of the array, including the reference count. I know that you mean for the general case, but the structure you describe is the same as `std.experimental.ndclice`s Slice!(1,T*): pointer, length, stride triplet. This would also work with higher dimensional Slices as well. Combine that with prefix allocator ét voilá.
