Re: Just one more thing...

2009-03-01 Thread Daniel Keep
Frits van Bommel wrote: > Sean Kelly wrote: >> Daniel Keep wrote: >>> extern(C) void __identifier("blah$UNIX2003")(int); >> >> That would be awesome. >> >>> A beneficial side-effect is that I can finally get rid of all those >>> mixins that are just doing this: >>> >>> mixin(`void `~name_of_fn~`(

Re: Profiling with DMD on Windows

2009-03-01 Thread Moritz Warning
On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 05:12:28 +0300, Sergey Gromov wrote: > I've just finished a two-part blog/article/tutorial on profiling. > Anybody interested, welcome. > > http://snakecoder.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/profiling-with-dmd-on- windows/ > http://snakecoder.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/profiling-with-dm

Profiling with DMD on Windows

2009-03-01 Thread Sergey Gromov
I've just finished a two-part blog/article/tutorial on profiling. Anybody interested, welcome. http://snakecoder.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/profiling-with-dmd-on-windows/ http://snakecoder.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/profiling-with-dmd-on-windows-getting-hands-dirty/ Walter also posted the first one o

Re: Just one more thing...

2009-03-01 Thread Frits van Bommel
Sean Kelly wrote: Daniel Keep wrote: extern(C) void __identifier("blah$UNIX2003")(int); That would be awesome. A beneficial side-effect is that I can finally get rid of all those mixins that are just doing this: mixin(`void `~name_of_fn~`(int a) { // ... rest of function ... }`); I ha

Re: Metaprogramming in D tonight at the NWCPP

2009-03-01 Thread BCS
Hello Walter, Robert Fraser wrote: Walter Bright wrote: http://www.nwcpp.org/ !!! I had a lab or I would have gone ;-( Any chance of a video...? Bartosz videotaped it, I imagine he'll put it up on the nwcpp.org web site soon. Bump ?

Re: Just one more thing...

2009-03-01 Thread Sean Kelly
Daniel Keep wrote: Sean Kelly wrote: One somewhat weird issue that we may have to face at some point is that Posix functions whose behavior was changed have had the symbol for the new function changed to _blah$UNIX2003, with the old function left in place. Since D can't declare symbols like t

Re: Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Derek Parnell
On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:16:43 -0800, Walter Bright wrote: > (With the recession and low fuel prices, tickets ought to be more > reasonable.) LOL -- Derek Parnell Melbourne, Australia skype: derek.j.parnell

Re: QtD 0.1 is out!

2009-03-01 Thread Walter Bright
Frits van Bommel wrote: Not even on a best-effort basis? It doesn't have to catch every possible case; I for one would be perfectly fine with it if it didn't catch the "I omitted a private import from my .di file" case... Doing so would require full blown data flow analysis, which the front

Re: Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Walter Bright
Nick Sabalausky wrote: The ability to actually get there. Which rules me out. Darnit! (And I can't swim through the rockies!) That's why god invented airplanes! (With the recession and low fuel prices, tickets ought to be more reasonable.)

Re: QtD 0.1 is out!

2009-03-01 Thread Frits van Bommel
Walter Bright wrote: Frits van Bommel wrote: Walter Bright wrote: The problem if it detects it in an implementation-defined manner is the source code is no longer portable. ... If the result of compilation provably won't *run* anyway, what's the problem with a compile-time error? Nothing,

Re: Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Nick Sabalausky
"Bill Baxter" wrote in message news:mailman.888.1235931134.22690.digitalmars-d-annou...@puremagic.com... > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Walter Bright > wrote: >> In Astoria, Oregon, on September 20-22 I'll be hosting a Compiler >> Construction seminar along with Cristian Vlasceanu. >> >> http

Re: Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Walter Bright
Bill Baxter wrote: What kind of pre-reqs are necessary? Fluency with C, C++, D, C# or Java. Some experience with an assembler language or virtual machine bytecode is desirable.

Re: QtD 0.1 is out!

2009-03-01 Thread Walter Bright
Frits van Bommel wrote: Walter Bright wrote: The problem if it detects it in an implementation-defined manner is the source code is no longer portable. ... If the result of compilation provably won't *run* anyway, what's the problem with a compile-time error? Nothing, it's just that the com

Re: QtD 0.1 is out!

2009-03-01 Thread Christopher Wright
Jarrett Billingsley wrote: On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Don wrote: The D system has a major limitation, though -- you can't split the source for a module across multiple files. Which pushes you towards enormous source files. It's more restricted than both C# and C++ in this respect. Yeah

Re: Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Bill Baxter
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Walter Bright wrote: > In Astoria, Oregon, on September 20-22 I'll be hosting a Compiler > Construction seminar along with Cristian Vlasceanu. > > http://www.astoriaseminar.com/compiler-construction.html > > It'll be a two day intensive course in how compilers work

Re: QtD 0.1 is out!

2009-03-01 Thread Jarrett Billingsley
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Don wrote: > > The D system has a major limitation, though -- you can't split the source > for a module across multiple files. Which pushes you towards enormous source > files. It's more restricted than both C# and C++ in this respect. > Yeah. Imagine if DMDFE we

Re: QtD 0.1 is out!

2009-03-01 Thread Don
Walter Bright wrote: Yigal Chripun wrote: this is related to D's compilation model which is copied from C/C++ and it seems to me that this model is outdated. C#'s model of assemblies and metadata seems more capable. for instance there's no need for header files, that info is stored in the meta

Re: QtD 0.1 is out!

2009-03-01 Thread Christopher Wright
Frits van Bommel wrote: Walter Bright wrote: Christopher Wright wrote: Walter Bright wrote: Christopher Wright wrote: Additionally, the compiler has sufficient information to complain about the problem at compile time, but it doesn't. That is a bug. No, it does not. The compiler doesn't kno

Re: QtD 0.1 is out!

2009-03-01 Thread Frits van Bommel
Walter Bright wrote: Christopher Wright wrote: Walter Bright wrote: Christopher Wright wrote: Additionally, the compiler has sufficient information to complain about the problem at compile time, but it doesn't. That is a bug. No, it does not. The compiler doesn't know about private imports o

Re: Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Tim M
On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 22:19:27 +1300, Brad Roberts wrote: Daniel Keep wrote: Walter Bright wrote: In Astoria, Oregon, on September 20-22 I'll be hosting a Compiler Construction seminar along with Cristian Vlasceanu. http://www.astoriaseminar.com/compiler-construction.html It'll be a two da

Re: Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Brad Roberts
Daniel Keep wrote: > > Walter Bright wrote: >> In Astoria, Oregon, on September 20-22 I'll be hosting a Compiler >> Construction seminar along with Cristian Vlasceanu. >> >> http://www.astoriaseminar.com/compiler-construction.html >> >> It'll be a two day intensive course in how compilers work and

Re: Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Daniel Keep
Walter Bright wrote: > In Astoria, Oregon, on September 20-22 I'll be hosting a Compiler > Construction seminar along with Cristian Vlasceanu. > > http://www.astoriaseminar.com/compiler-construction.html > > It'll be a two day intensive course in how compilers work and how to > build them. Cur

Compiler Construction seminar, Sep 20-22

2009-03-01 Thread Walter Bright
In Astoria, Oregon, on September 20-22 I'll be hosting a Compiler Construction seminar along with Cristian Vlasceanu. http://www.astoriaseminar.com/compiler-construction.html It'll be a two day intensive course in how compilers work and how to build them.