Re: Got a post for the D Blog?
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 06:36:15 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote: On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 06:23:29 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:29:13 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: Would it be interesting to have a blog post about implement support for Objective-C in D? That would be very technical and quite low level. Absolutely! I could write something about the CTFE engine. And how I plan to beat the llvm jit :) I'd be very interested in such a post. And it would provide some good publicity for D.
Re: Release D 2.072.0
On 11/01/2016 11:41 AM, Johan Engelen wrote: On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 01:27:08 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.072.0. DMD 2.072.0 miscompiles/uncovers a bug in LDC, so I switched back to DMD 2.071.2 for CI testing. :( Is there somebody working on that bug? Thanks. -- Andrei
Re: Release D 2.072.0
On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 01:27:08 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.072.0. DMD 2.072.0 miscompiles/uncovers a bug in LDC, so I switched back to DMD 2.071.2 for CI testing. :( -Johan
Re: Ever want to compile D on your Android phone? Well, now you can!
On Sunday, 24 January 2016 at 15:12:30 UTC, Joakim wrote: An alpha release of ldc, the llvm-based D compiler, for Android devices is now available. It is best used with the excellent Termux app (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.termux=en) and a bluetooth keyboard. ;) Updated test runners, that run most tests from the standard library on any Android device, are also available (results have been reported for everything from a TomTom BRIDGE GPS navigation device to a Huawei Watch): https://github.com/joakim-noah/android/releases/tag/polish You can install a test runner app or run a command-line binary. Please report your results in this thread in the ldc forum, which requires no registration, with the info and format requested there, particularly for Android 4.1 or earlier: https://forum.dlang.org/thread/bafrkjfwmoyriyhmq...@forum.dlang.org If you try out the native compiler, take a look at the README that comes with it for instructions. If you have a D/OpenGL app you'd like to port to Android and submit to the Play Store, let me know if I can help with that process. great, thanks))
Re: Ever want to compile D on your Android phone? Well, now you can!
On 10/29/16 8:55 PM, rikki cattermole wrote:
On 30/10/2016 10:47 AM, Mergul wrote:
Application always crash when I'm using android_app.savedState.
if (state.savedState != null) {
// We are starting with a previous saved state; restore from it.
engine.state = *cast(saved_state*)state.savedState; //crash!
}
Don't compare against null using =, compare using is.
if (state.savedState !is null) {
android_app.savedState appears to be defined here:
https://github.com/joakim-noah/android/blob/polish/android_native_app_glue.d#L56
It's a void *. So comparing against null with != is identical to !is.
There are actually cases where comparing against null with != is valid,
and what you want exactly (e.g. comparing a string to null to check for
empty string).
In this case, fixing the comparison is not the answer. What is happening
is one of several things:
1. I don't know what type `engine` is, so if it's a pointer, then
dereferencing the state member may be the culprit if engine is invalid.
2. If state is a pointer, then you could be crashing at the if statement
(unlikely).
3. state or state.savedState isn't being properly initialized.
4. Something else (e.g. code generation error). Hope it's not this one.
-Steve
Re: Release vibe.d 0.7.30
Am 01.11.2016 um 14:29 schrieb John Colvin: On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:47:13 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2016-11-01 12:20, Saurabh Das wrote: How can I find out more information about the 'runApplication' change? What does "slowly fading out" mean? I think it should say something like: "slowly fading out the default main". Instead of having vibe.d define the main function and having a shared module constructor with all the setup, you can define your own main function with all the setup and then call runApplication, which basically contains the same logic as the main function defined by vibe.d. Is "phasing" the word that's being looked for here? I.e. "slowly phasing out the default main". Yes that sounds better. I'll change it and complete that partial sentence.
Re: Release vibe.d 0.7.30
Am 01.11.2016 um 12:20 schrieb Saurabh Das: On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 09:09:05 UTC, Saurabh Das wrote: On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:30:22 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote: [...] I'm going to try this out today! :) How can I find out more information about the 'runApplication' change? What does "slowly fading out" mean? A summary would be: runApplication does the same as runEventLoop, plus performing command line finalization and privilege lowering. This is the same that VibeDefaultMain otherwise does, with the only difference that it is invoked with an explicit function call.
Re: Release vibe.d 0.7.30
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:47:13 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2016-11-01 12:20, Saurabh Das wrote: How can I find out more information about the 'runApplication' change? What does "slowly fading out" mean? I think it should say something like: "slowly fading out the default main". Instead of having vibe.d define the main function and having a shared module constructor with all the setup, you can define your own main function with all the setup and then call runApplication, which basically contains the same logic as the main function defined by vibe.d. Is "phasing" the word that's being looked for here? I.e. "slowly phasing out the default main".
Re: Release vibe.d 0.7.30
On 2016-11-01 13:47, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2016-11-01 12:20, Saurabh Das wrote: How can I find out more information about the 'runApplication' change? What does "slowly fading out" mean? I think it should say something like: "slowly fading out the default main". Instead of having vibe.d define the main function and having a shared module constructor with all the setup, you can define your own main function with all the setup and then call runApplication, which basically contains the same logic as the main function defined by vibe.d. For reference, here's the commit that introduced the change: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/vibe.d/commit/f7ba59a6c80dc85882654138087bad579480cadf -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: Release vibe.d 0.7.30
On 2016-11-01 12:20, Saurabh Das wrote: How can I find out more information about the 'runApplication' change? What does "slowly fading out" mean? I think it should say something like: "slowly fading out the default main". Instead of having vibe.d define the main function and having a shared module constructor with all the setup, you can define your own main function with all the setup and then call runApplication, which basically contains the same logic as the main function defined by vibe.d. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: Release D 2.072.0
On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 07:27:50 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Is the only valid remaining use for the comma operator the
'for' loop iteration?
for ( ; ; ++i, ++j) {
// ...
}
Are there other uses?
The changelog shows it can be used for an expression statement:
// This is okay, the result is not used.
if (!mc)
mc = new MyContainerClass, mc.append(new Entry);
I've made a pull to improve the comma examples, e.g. adding
brackets (mc = ...), mc.append and removing unnecessary
statements:
https://github.com/dlang/dlang.org/pull/1502
Would be good if someone could review and merge.
Re: Got a post for the D Blog?
On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 03:51:16 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: I want to publish more posts like Andreas's 'Find Was Too Damn Slow, So We Fixed It` [1] (which, by the way, is the most-viewed post so far, just ahead of Joakim's interview with Walter [2]), or Steven's 'How to Write @trusted Code in D' [3], but I need help. [1] http://dlang.org/blog/2016/06/16/find-was-too-damn-slow-so-we-fixed-it/ [2] http://dlang.org/blog/2016/08/30/ruminations-on-d-an-interview-with-walter-bright/ [3] http://dlang.org/blog/2016/09/28/how-to-write-trusted-code-in-d/ I take that as a compliment. Thanks! The rest of you, take that as a challenge. ;) What I would like to read about would be LuaD [4] or ctRegex [5], because they are great demos of CTFE. The auto-tester would be worth an article as well. Not about the implementation details, but about its features and the PR workflow. Also, some embedded D use like kernel or freestanding stuff. None of these are "I fixed something in D" though. Hm, Taking a look through the recent 072 changelog, I found two items which could be worth a story: * std.range.padLeft and std.range.padRight were added (if someone can write comedy and wants to take some jabs at the Javascript leftPad story) * std.range.generate fixed to be a proper range (I remember some heated discussion about the semantics of front) [4] http://jakobovrum.github.io/LuaD/ [5] https://dlang.org/phobos/std_regex.html#.ctRegex
Re: Release vibe.d 0.7.30
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 09:09:05 UTC, Saurabh Das wrote: On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:30:22 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote: [...] I'm going to try this out today! :) How can I find out more information about the 'runApplication' change? What does "slowly fading out" mean?
Re: Release vibe.d 0.7.30
On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:30:22 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote: Main changes over 0.7.29: - Compiles on the latest DMD version (2.068.x-2.072.0) - Added a new authorization framework for the web/REST interface generators - Extended the serialization framework with more hooks and traits, enabling the use of custom UDAs - vibe-sdlang [1] is an SDLang serialization module that became possible this way - opDispatch has been removed from Bson/Json - Optional support for using diet-ng [2] has been added and is enabled by default for new projects - for existing projects, add diet-ng as a dependency or add it to dub.selections.json - The HTTP client can now be used on Unix socket destinations - Added table support for the Markdown compiler [...] I'm going to try this out today! :)
Re: Got a post for the D Blog?
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 06:23:29 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:29:13 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: Would it be interesting to have a blog post about implement support for Objective-C in D? That would be very technical and quite low level. Absolutely! I could write something about the CTFE engine. And how I plan to beat the llvm jit :)
Re: Got a post for the D Blog?
On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:29:13 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: Would it be interesting to have a blog post about implement support for Objective-C in D? That would be very technical and quite low level. Absolutely!
