D books for $5

[Kai Nacke via Digitalmars-d-announce]

Hi all,

Packt Publishing offers eBooks for $5 for a limited time. If your 
collection of D eBooks is still incomplete then this is a great 
chance for you. :-)


D Cookbook by Adam D. Ruppe 
(https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/d-cookbook)
Learning D by Michael Parker 
(https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/learning-d)
D Web Development by myself 
(https://www.packtpub.com/web-development/d-web-development)


Regards,
Kai

Re: DIP 1003: remove `body` as a keyword

[Basile B. via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 21:19:30 UTC, Meta wrote:

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 15:31:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 20:27:36 UTC, Meta wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 11:33:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
DIP 1003 is faddish. It would really be better to have a 
system that would allow any keyword to be used as 
identifier. An escape system is the key.


It would also guarantee that the DIP would not be accepted. 
With this DIP I aimed


Sorry in a previous post there's been a confusion from my 
part, I thought the author was "Cauterite".


for the smallest possible change that would alleviate the 
problem of not being able to use `body` as a symbol name, 
hoping that the smallness of the problem and ease of 
implementation would make it much more likely to be accepted.


I won't insist too much but to be clear, the escape solution 
is incredibly simple to implement (7 SLOC !). I've decided to 
go further in order to demonstrate it:


https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6324


I saw your PR but I don't really agree that it's a good 
solution. If you have to preface the symbol with # then you 
might as well just use a trailing underscore, like "body_".


No, there are 2 differences.

- 1: even if in the source you write #body, the identifier, as 
known by the compiler, is really just "body", like shown in the 
test that uses `pragma(identifier)`. For example a serializer 
would write "body" without any kind of processing (unlike what 's 
to be done using the basic underscore solution).


- 2: the underscore is a valid identifier char, # is not so you 
cannot distinguish a keyword suffixed with an underscore because 
it might be intentional, i.e part of the identifier.

Re: DIP 1003: remove `body` as a keyword

[Meta via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 15:31:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 20:27:36 UTC, Meta wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 11:33:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
DIP 1003 is faddish. It would really be better to have a 
system that would allow any keyword to be used as identifier. 
An escape system is the key.


It would also guarantee that the DIP would not be accepted. 
With this DIP I aimed


Sorry in a previous post there's been a confusion from my part, 
I thought the author was "Cauterite".


for the smallest possible change that would alleviate the 
problem of not being able to use `body` as a symbol name, 
hoping that the smallness of the problem and ease of 
implementation would make it much more likely to be accepted.


I won't insist too much but to be clear, the escape solution is 
incredibly simple to implement (7 SLOC !). I've decided to go 
further in order to demonstrate it:


https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6324


I saw your PR but I don't really agree that it's a good solution. 
If you have to preface the symbol with # then you might as well 
just use a trailing underscore, like "body_".

Re: unDE 0.1.0: original file manager, image and text viewer

[unDEFER via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 20:35:16 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
That's interesting, unfortunately for you there's a more 
advanced version of a ZUI file explorer 
(http://eaglemode.sourceforge.net/index.html). How much your 
respective projects are related ?


As I understand eaglemode is only viewer. I want to go further. 
After version 0.1.0 there is will:

0.2.0 - command line
0.3.0 - text editor with IDE (with extremely support of D of 
course)

0.4.0 - graphic editor
and so on..

Re: unDE 0.1.0: original file manager, image and text viewer

[Basile B. via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 20:16:10 UTC, unDEFER wrote:

Hello, my dear friends!
So many days you answers on many my questions.
And today I glad to present my work: unDE 0.1.0.
It is very original file manager, image and text viewer.
More information: http://unde.sourceforge.net/en/ch24.html
Video with English subtitles: https://youtu.be/29zuxU9eyXo


That's interesting, unfortunately for you there's a more advanced 
version of a ZUI file explorer 
(http://eaglemode.sourceforge.net/index.html). How much your 
respective projects are related ?

Re: DIP 1003: remove `body` as a keyword

[Basile B. via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 18:44:42 UTC, Namespace wrote:

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 15:31:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 20:27:36 UTC, Meta wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 11:33:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
DIP 1003 is faddish. It would really be better to have a 
system that would allow any keyword to be used as 
identifier. An escape system is the key.


It would also guarantee that the DIP would not be accepted. 
With this DIP I aimed


Sorry in a previous post there's been a confusion from my 
part, I thought the author was "Cauterite".


for the smallest possible change that would alleviate the 
problem of not being able to use `body` as a symbol name, 
hoping that the smallness of the problem and ease of 
implementation would make it much more likely to be accepted.


I won't insist too much but to be clear, the escape solution 
is incredibly simple to implement (7 SLOC !). I've decided to 
go further in order to demonstrate it:


https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6324


Switch from # to @ and even the guys here are satisfied: 
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/fiwfcsqmjsndcjixi...@forum.dlang.org


Irony I suppose ?


Two birds - one stone (;


Exactly...If # is used to make function attributes (like in point 
4 of 
http://forum.dlang.org/post/lllbfrmrhsjafijlo...@forum.dlang.org) 
then #const like in PR 6324 doesn't work...anyway one of the idea 
is more concrete than the other. ;)

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 15 December 2016 at 21:03, John Colvin via Digitalmars-d-announce
 wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 19:58:50 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> This will be the direction that I anticipate to head in until a time comes
>> where the frontend exposes everything GDC depends upon in order to bootstrap
>> to the latest stable branch.
>
>
> Is there a good list of what is necessary somewhere publicly visible?

Not really, as I will only know the full extent when either I or
someone else sits down and tries it out.

I can of course update the GDC on-going projects page that someone
reminds me to do on a yearly basis before GSOC comes round the corner,
but that quickly goes out of date within a month or two.

I can say that I anticipate the following will need fixing though:

- Backport CTFloat from upstream.
- Remove 'import ddmd.mars' from all frontend modules.
- Add many more static create functions - TypeStruct::create,
StructDeclaration::create, there are probably a dozen or so more.

Here's the wiki that needs TLC. http://wiki.dlang.org/GDC/ProjectIdeas

Regards.

unDE 0.1.0: original file manager, image and text viewer

[unDEFER via Digitalmars-d-announce]

Hello, my dear friends!
So many days you answers on many my questions.
And today I glad to present my work: unDE 0.1.0.
It is very original file manager, image and text viewer.
More information: http://unde.sourceforge.net/en/ch24.html
Video with English subtitles: https://youtu.be/29zuxU9eyXo

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[John Colvin via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 19:58:50 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
This will be the direction that I anticipate to head in until a 
time comes where the frontend exposes everything GDC depends 
upon in order to bootstrap to the latest stable branch.


Is there a good list of what is necessary somewhere publicly 
visible?

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 15 December 2016 at 20:46, Ilya Yaroshenko via
Digitalmars-d-announce  wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 19:15:41 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> On 15 December 2016 at 18:43, Ilya Yaroshenko via Digitalmars-d-announce
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>>
>> I think I understand what you are trying to say, but I've had to re-read
>> it at least a dozen times because you' either grok very little about how the
>> internals are threaded together, or fully grok that but invented your own
>> words to describe them.
>>
>> In either case, you're complaints are easily resolved by using a
>> cross-compiler.  You don't need to building D programs for new targets on
>> the same CPU that will be running the program.
>>
>> And I think this is the point that you are missing.  Even though you are
>> alluding to wanting a D compiler that does not depend on druntime (what you
>> call betterC, which is at best a gross misunderstanding of what betterC
>> actually does).
>>
>> To almost prove a point, there are 26 cross compilers for GDC in Debian,
>> almost all of which do not have druntime library support (yet).
>>
>>
>> https://packages.debian.org/search?suite=stretch=all=any=names=gdc-6-
>
>
> Ah, this is awesome! Thank you!
> I though that we have not easy way for cross-compilation. If
> cross-compilation is not a problem then I am OK about DMD FE depends on
> DRuntime.
>
> BTW, when the next GDC release will be available?

GCC will release 6.3 before Christmas, I'll try to co-ordinate getting
downloadable binaries for travisCI out at the same time also.

Bear in mind that GDC will be feature complete up to 2.068.2, but
includes a number of bug fixes from latter versions.  This will be the
direction that I anticipate to head in until a time comes where the
frontend exposes everything GDC depends upon in order to bootstrap to
the latest stable branch.

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Ilya Yaroshenko via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 19:15:41 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 15 December 2016 at 18:43, Ilya Yaroshenko via 
Digitalmars-d-announce  
wrote:

[...]


I think I understand what you are trying to say, but I've had 
to re-read it at least a dozen times because you' either grok 
very little about how the internals are threaded together, or 
fully grok that but invented your own words to describe them.


In either case, you're complaints are easily resolved by using 
a cross-compiler.  You don't need to building D programs for 
new targets on the same CPU that will be running the program.


And I think this is the point that you are missing.  Even 
though you are alluding to wanting a D compiler that does not 
depend on druntime (what you call betterC, which is at best a 
gross misunderstanding of what betterC actually does).


To almost prove a point, there are 26 cross compilers for GDC 
in Debian, almost all of which do not have druntime library 
support (yet).


https://packages.debian.org/search?suite=stretch=all=any=names=gdc-6-


Ah, this is awesome! Thank you!
I though that we have not easy way for cross-compilation. If 
cross-compilation is not a problem then I am OK about DMD FE 
depends on DRuntime.


BTW, when the next GDC release will be available?

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 15 December 2016 at 18:43, Ilya Yaroshenko via
Digitalmars-d-announce  wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 14:40:55 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
>>
>> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 14:14:41 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 13:46:36 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:

 On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
>
>
> Please, no :-(
> Mir needs betterC DMD FE


 What for ?
 Are you using the compiler frontend ?
 And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
 So you could not be using it right now.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I hope I will be able to use ldc/gdc on new targets, which do not
>>> have DRuntime.
>>
>>
>> There is nothing wrong with dmd then.
>> Most of the code related to -betterC is in the glue code which means you
>> need to bug the ldc and gdc devs. Either way, if they don't have a working
>> druntime don't expect codegen to be valid for said target.
>
>
> If  DMD FE is a betterC library, then DRuntime is not required to build a
> betterC D program with LDC/GCC, is no it?

I think I understand what you are trying to say, but I've had to
re-read it at least a dozen times because you' either grok very little
about how the internals are threaded together, or fully grok that but
invented your own words to describe them.

In either case, you're complaints are easily resolved by using a
cross-compiler.  You don't need to building D programs for new targets
on the same CPU that will be running the program.

And I think this is the point that you are missing.  Even though you
are alluding to wanting a D compiler that does not depend on druntime
(what you call betterC, which is at best a gross misunderstanding of
what betterC actually does).

To almost prove a point, there are 26 cross compilers for GDC in
Debian, almost all of which do not have druntime library support
(yet).

https://packages.debian.org/search?suite=stretch=all=any=names=gdc-6-

Re: Boston Dlang Meetup December 15th

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 11/29/16 9:42 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

Going to be at the Capital One Cafe again in the back bay. I'll give a
talk on how druntime is constructed.

Details here:
https://www.meetup.com/Boston-area-D-Programming-Language-Meetup/events/235904059/


And here is where the live stream will be, so I don't forget this time!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR3q_B4-0u4

See you all then!

-Steve

Re: DIP 1003: remove `body` as a keyword

[Namespace via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 15:31:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 20:27:36 UTC, Meta wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 11:33:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
DIP 1003 is faddish. It would really be better to have a 
system that would allow any keyword to be used as identifier. 
An escape system is the key.


It would also guarantee that the DIP would not be accepted. 
With this DIP I aimed


Sorry in a previous post there's been a confusion from my part, 
I thought the author was "Cauterite".


for the smallest possible change that would alleviate the 
problem of not being able to use `body` as a symbol name, 
hoping that the smallness of the problem and ease of 
implementation would make it much more likely to be accepted.


I won't insist too much but to be clear, the escape solution is 
incredibly simple to implement (7 SLOC !). I've decided to go 
further in order to demonstrate it:


https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6324


Switch from # to @ and even the guys here are satisfied: 
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/fiwfcsqmjsndcjixi...@forum.dlang.org


Two birds - one stone (;

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Nordlöw via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 01:04:54 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6310


Great work!

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Ilya Yaroshenko via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 14:40:55 UTC, Rikki Cattermole 
wrote:
On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 14:14:41 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko 
wrote:
On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 13:46:36 UTC, Stefan Koch 
wrote:
On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya 
Yaroshenko wrote:


Please, no :-(
Mir needs betterC DMD FE


What for ?
Are you using the compiler frontend ?
And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
So you could not be using it right now.


Yes, I hope I will be able to use ldc/gdc on new targets, 
which do not have DRuntime.


There is nothing wrong with dmd then.
Most of the code related to -betterC is in the glue code which 
means you need to bug the ldc and gdc devs. Either way, if they 
don't have a working druntime don't expect codegen to be valid 
for said target.


If  DMD FE is a betterC library, then DRuntime is not required to 
build a betterC D program with LDC/GCC, is no it?

Re: DIP 1003: remove `body` as a keyword

[Basile B. via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 20:27:36 UTC, Meta wrote:

On Sunday, 11 December 2016 at 11:33:40 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
DIP 1003 is faddish. It would really be better to have a 
system that would allow any keyword to be used as identifier. 
An escape system is the key.


It would also guarantee that the DIP would not be accepted. 
With this DIP I aimed


Sorry in a previous post there's been a confusion from my part, I 
thought the author was "Cauterite".


for the smallest possible change that would alleviate the 
problem of not being able to use `body` as a symbol name, 
hoping that the smallness of the problem and ease of 
implementation would make it much more likely to be accepted.


I won't insist too much but to be clear, the escape solution is 
incredibly simple to implement (7 SLOC !). I've decided to go 
further in order to demonstrate it:


https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6324

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 14:14:41 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko 
wrote:
On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 13:46:36 UTC, Stefan Koch 
wrote:
On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko 
wrote:


Please, no :-(
Mir needs betterC DMD FE


What for ?
Are you using the compiler frontend ?
And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
So you could not be using it right now.


Yes, I hope I will be able to use ldc/gdc on new targets, which 
do not have DRuntime.


There is nothing wrong with dmd then.
Most of the code related to -betterC is in the glue code which 
means you need to bug the ldc and gdc devs. Either way, if they 
don't have a working druntime don't expect codegen to be valid 
for said target.

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Ilya Yaroshenko via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 13:46:36 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko 
wrote:


Please, no :-(
Mir needs betterC DMD FE


What for ?
Are you using the compiler frontend ?
And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
So you could not be using it right now.


Yes, I hope I will be able to use ldc/gdc on new targets, which 
do not have DRuntime.

Re: Milestone - DMD front end is now 100% D!

[Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko 
wrote:


Please, no :-(
Mir needs betterC DMD FE


What for ?
Are you using the compiler frontend ?
And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
So you could not be using it right now.

std.experimental.checkedint Formal Review

[Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d-announce]

http://forum.dlang.org/post/mnounbaobgphbmanf...@forum.dlang.org

Silicon Valley D Meetup - December 22, 2016 - "The Curse of Knowledge: Et tu, D?" by Adam Wilson

[Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-announce]

Adam Wilson, a past DConf speaker, has graciously accepted to be our 
guest speaker this month. Although he will present in-person, as usual, 
we will be live on Google Hangouts as well. I will post the link here 
right before we start at 7pm Pacific time.


Come in-person at 6:30pm for food and drinks but plea^H^H^H^H RSVP so we 
know how much to order:


  https://www.meetup.com/D-Lang-Silicon-Valley/events/236253882/

Abstract:

The Curse of Knowledge is a cognitive bias where a highly skilled person 
unknowingly assumes that others have the required background to 
understand a given topic. But what happens when a group of intelligent, 
like-minded, software engineers design a library? This talk will compare 
and contrast library designs with an emphasis on how we can use the 
power of D to improve the usability of our libraries. This exploration 
of library design will culminate in a discussion of how well designed 
libraries can be used to rapidly construct the services that businesses 
rely on and capture mind-share for D in the process.


Ali