On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 5:55:05 PM MDT Nicholas Wilson via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 23:36:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 5:17:44 PM MDT Nicholas Wilson
> >
> > via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> >> it
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 23:55:05 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
The bog-standard way of dealing with avoidable breakage with
DIPs is a -dip-10xx flag. In this case, if set, would prefer to
call copy constructors over blit + postblit.
Also adding @implicit is a backwards incompatible
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 23:36:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 5:17:44 PM MDT Nicholas Wilson
via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
it seems that even if we were to want to have @implicit as an
opposite of C++'s explicit it would _always_ be present on
On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 4:11:20 PM MDT Manu via Digitalmars-d-
announce wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 04:40, Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce
>
> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:22:55 UTC, rikki cattermole
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Here is a question (that I don't think
On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 5:17:44 PM MDT Nicholas Wilson via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> it seems that even if we were to want to have @implicit as an
> opposite of C++'s explicit it would _always_ be present on
> copy-constructors which means that @implicit for copy
> constructors
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 22:11:20 UTC, Manu wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 04:40, Dejan Lekic via
Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:22:55 UTC, rikki
cattermole wrote:
>
> Here is a question (that I don't think has been asked) why
> not
> @copy?
>
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 04:40, Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:22:55 UTC, rikki cattermole
> wrote:
> >
> > Here is a question (that I don't think has been asked) why not
> > @copy?
> >
> > @copy this(ref Foo other) { }
> >
> > It can be read
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 19:39:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
However, Andrei does not believe that the risk is worth it and
insists that we need a way to differentiate between the new
copy constructors and any existing constructors that happen to
look like them. So, there won't be
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 03:08:33PM +, RazvanN via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
> I have finished writing the last details of the copy constructor
> DIP[1] and also I have published the first implementation [2].
[...]
Here are some comments:
- The DIP should address what @implicit means
On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 1:18:11 PM MDT Gary Willoughby via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 16:40:45 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > Ultimately, I expect that if we add any attribute for this,
> > people coming to D are going to think that it's
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 16:40:45 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Ultimately, I expect that if we add any attribute for this,
people coming to D are going to think that it's downright
weird, but if we're going to have one, if we go with @implicit,
we're future-proofing things a bit, and
On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 10:04:57 AM MDT Elie Morisse via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 11:39:21 UTC, Dejan Lekic
>
> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:22:55 UTC, rikki cattermole
> >
> > wrote:
> >> Here is a question (that I don't think
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 11:39:21 UTC, Dejan Lekic
wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:22:55 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
Here is a question (that I don't think has been asked) why not
@copy?
@copy this(ref Foo other) { }
It can be read as copy constructor, which would be
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 23:56:56 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/11/2018 8:08 AM, RazvanN wrote:
[1] https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/pull/129
[2] https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8688
Thank you, RazvanN!
I very much agree!
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 04:02:14 UTC, Soulsbane wrote:
On Sunday, 12 August 2018 at 15:07:04 UTC, Anton Fediushin
wrote:
Hello, I'm glad to announce that silly v0.0.1 is released.
Silly is a brand-new test runner with simplicity in mind. It's
developed to be as simple as possible
On Sunday, 9 September 2018 at 14:27:45 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
If you're serious then why not request an absentee ballot?
Just out of curiosity, how does posting this info here help you
in any way?
I was kind of wondering this too and in worst case a technical
error as described is not really
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:22:55 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
Here is a question (that I don't think has been asked) why not
@copy?
@copy this(ref Foo other) { }
It can be read as copy constructor, which would be excellent
for helping people learn what it is doing (spec lookup).
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:08:33 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
Hello everyone,
I have finished writing the last details of the copy
constructor DIP[1] and also I have published the first
implementation [2]. As I wrongfully made a PR for the DIP queue
in the early stages of the development of
18 matches
Mail list logo
