On 6/15/13 2:36 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 6/14/13 10:08 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:15:08 +0200
Andrei Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Please vote and discuss on the social channels.
The [HD] archive.org link doesn't appear to be working. Or is
David Nadlinger c...@klickverbot.at wrote in message
news:qikvjtuajorstsxhh...@forum.dlang.org...
Derp. Turns out that actually calling the newly added Expression::init
during startup might be a good idea.
That must have been interesting. They are never dereferenced, so no
immediate
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:15:08 +0200
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Please vote and discuss on the social channels.
Torrents/links up:
http://semitwist.com/download/misc/dconf2013/
Slowly catching up with published videos :)
This has kind of convinced me that once D gets wider usage, tools
similar to AnalyzeD may become de-facto standard part of any
production toolchain, with a configurable rule set. D is complex
and multi-paradigm language (which rocks) and any single
On 2013-06-12 14:50, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1g6x9g/dconf_2013_code_analysis_for_d_with_analyzed/
Hackernews: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5867764
Twitter: https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/344798127775182849
Facebook:
On 2013-06-14 17:13, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
With @UDAs, we have a lot of unrealized power for unit tests.
I have asked for ModuleInfo to contain an rtInfo member [1], like
TypeInfo does. With that, and possibly splitting the unit tests into
individual functions (if not done already, I
On 2013-06-14 23:09, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Yes, I know. BTW, how many people is using it (if any)? If some could
share the experience it would be appreciated.
I use it :). My experience so far is if you don't take advantage of
these buffers it can be a bit annoying. The reason is that
On Saturday, 15 June 2013 at 06:32:13 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
That must have been interesting. They are never dereferenced,
so no
immediate crash, you'd just get whichever code path was tested
first...
It was – especially because I was looking for a cause in the
DMD/LDC diff first before
On 06/14/2013 11:03 AM, bearophile wrote:
Don:
I don't think contracts can be much use to a static analyzer if they
can contain arbitrary code.
The other contract systems I know of (Eiffel, Ada, C#, Sing#), plus few
other systems that use the type system for similar reasons (Liquid
Haskell,
On 06/15/2013 05:14 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-06-12 14:50, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1g6x9g/dconf_2013_code_analysis_for_d_with_analyzed/
Hackernews: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5867764
Twitter:
Timon Gehr:
Eiffel can call arbitrary methods in contracts.
This is surprising.
Maybe the Modern Eiffel is more strict.
I disagree. The only problem is the verboseness of the contract
system.
If your contracts contain arbitrary D code, I don't think a
static analyser will be able to use
On 06/16/2013 12:07 AM, bearophile wrote:
Timon Gehr:
Eiffel can call arbitrary methods in contracts.
This is surprising.
Maybe the Modern Eiffel is more strict.
It's design isn't finished, but IIRC it enforces purity, contracts can
be arbitrarily complex, and manual proofs are required.
I don't understand this topic well enough, so I am not saying
useful things. Thank you for your comments Timon...
Bye,
bearophile
13 matches
Mail list logo
