On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 21:38:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/12/2018 8:28 AM, 12345swordy wrote:
The issue that I see is unintended implicit conversation when
passing values to functions that have both int and bool
overloads.
The exact same thing happens when there are both int
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 05:59:52 UTC, Manu wrote:
Nice work.
Oh wow, this is pretty rough!
```
void createTable() {
this.table = [
, , , , ,
,
, , , , ,
,
, , , ,
...
```
Here's one I prepared earlier:
https://github.com/TurkeyMan/superemu (probably doesn't work
with
On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 5:55 AM blahness via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Not sure how interested people here will be with this but I've
> ported https://github.com/fogleman/nes from Go to D [1]. I should
> point out that I'm not the author of the original Go version.
>
> The
On Saturday, 3 February 2018 at 13:52:17 UTC, blahness wrote:
Hi everyone,
Not sure how interested people here will be with this but I've
ported https://github.com/fogleman/nes from Go to D [1]. I
should point out that I'm not the author of the original Go
version.
The emulator code itself
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 02:12:30AM +, 12345swordy via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 21:38:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
[...]
> > The underlying issue is is bool a one bit integer type, or something
> > special? D defines it as a one bit integer type, fitting
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 21:38:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/12/2018 8:28 AM, 12345swordy wrote:
The issue that I see is unintended implicit conversation when
passing values to functions that have both int and bool
overloads.
The exact same thing happens when there are both int
On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:28:46 +, Isaac S. wrote:
> Sorry if it wasn't clear, I meant that if `enum Foo : some_int_type`
> makes it so some_int_type is preferred (because it's a more direct
> conversion) DScanner could warn anyone that just does `enum Foo`.
Sorry, I read too hastily and thought
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 00:21:25 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:08:04 +, Isaac S. wrote:
If you really want this plaque in the language, at least make
it not affect those that gave their enum a type. If you at
least do that, someone can add it to DScanner to tell
On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:08:04 +, Isaac S. wrote:
> If you really want this plaque in the language, at least make it not
> affect those that gave their enum a type. If you at least do that,
> someone can add it to DScanner to tell anyone that doesn't type their
> enum to expect illogical
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 14:07:39 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
> => conversion>
>=> conversion>
One confusion is from value range propagation / constant folding reaching
past the static type information to yield a different result from what
static typing alone
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 22:07:39 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
*snip*
Both f(int) and f(short) match, because implicit conversions
rank the same.
To disambiguate, f(short) is pitted against f(int) using
partial ordering rules,
which are:
Can a short be used to call f(int)? Yes.
Can
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 21:29:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
*snip*
In my college daze I was learning programming alongside
designing and building digital circuits, and later software for
FPGAs and PLDs (ABEL). The notions of True, T, 1, !0 (from C
and Asm), and +5V are all completely
On 11/12/2018 1:39 PM, 12345swordy wrote:
OK, I got to know what language you were using at the time, because I am curious
at what other oddities does it have.
I wish I could remember what it was. It was like 40 years ago :-)
On 11/12/2018 12:34 PM, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
Tell me more about this "consistency".
int f(short s) { return 1; }
int f(int i) { return 2; }
enum : int { a = 0 }
enum A : int { a = 0 }
pragma (msg, f(a)); // calls f(int)
pragma (msg, f(A.a)); // calls f(short)
I.e. it's consistent.
On 11/12/2018 11:28 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
D used to have a `bit` type, wy back in the day. It was renamed to `bool`
way back in D 0.148, released Feb 25, 2006.
D's old bit type was not a bool. It literally was a single bit, and an array of
bits was packed into an int by the compiler.
On 11/12/2018 8:28 AM, 12345swordy wrote:
The issue that I see is unintended implicit conversation when passing values to
functions that have both int and bool overloads.
The exact same thing happens when there are both int and short overloads.
The underlying issue is is bool a one bit
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 21:29:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I once worked with software that defined true as 0 and false as
1
OK, I got to know what language you were using at the time,
because I am curious at what other oddities does it have.
-Alex
On 11/12/2018 2:05 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
*sigh* Well, I guess that's the core issue right there. A lot of us would
strongly disagree with the idea that bool is an integral type and consider
code that treats it as such as inviting bugs.
In my college daze I was learning programming
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 20:34:11 +, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
> enum : int { a = 0 }
> enum A : int { a = 0 }
> f(a); // calls the int overload f(A.a); // calls the bool overload
>
> Tell me more about this "consistency".
Filed issue 19394. (Sorry for spam.)
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 09:45:14 +, Mike Parker wrote:
> From Example B in the DIP:
>
> ```
> int f(bool b) { return 1; }
> int f(int i) { return 2; }
>
> enum E : int {
> a = 0,
> b = 1,
> c = 2,
> }
> ```
>
> Here, f(a) and f(b) call the bool overload, while f(c) calls the int
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 14:10:42 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> But it's not consistent:
And std.traits.isIntegral has not considered bools integral since its
initial creation in 2007. Both Walter and Andrei have mucked about with
that code and saw no reason to change it, even in wild and
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 18:25:22 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
I can’t say I have a strong opinion on this, but possibly it
would be right to have an integral “bit” type to differentiate
it from the Boolean type, just like we have a “byte” type to
differentiate it from “char”...
D used
On 11/12/18 4:45 AM, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1015, "Deprecation and removal of implicit conversion from integer
and character literals to bool, has been rejected, primarily on the
grounds that it is factually incorrect in treating bool as a type
distinct from other integral types.
The TL;DR
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 17:49:55 UTC, Joakim wrote:
[…]
it's quite simple: they view a bool as an integral type with
two possible values, a `bit` if you like. As such, they prefer
to fit it into the existing scheme for integral types rather
than special-casing booleans as Mike proposed.
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 17:25:15 UTC, Johannes Loher wrote:
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 16:39:47 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Walter and Andrei take the position that this is incorrect the
wrong way to view a bool.
Unfortunately you did not include their justification for this
position
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 17:25:15 UTC, Johannes Loher wrote:
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 16:39:47 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Walter and Andrei take the position that this is incorrect the
wrong way to view a bool.
Unfortunately you did not include their justification for this
position
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 16:39:47 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Walter and Andrei take the position that this is incorrect the
wrong way to view a bool.
Unfortunately you did not include their justification for this
position (if any). To me it would be interesting to know about
the reasoning
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 15:15:17 UTC, M.M. wrote:
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 15:03:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 09:45:14 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
The TL;DR is that the DIP is trying to change behavior that
is working as intended.
I thought the whole
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 10:05:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Monday, November 12, 2018 2:45:14 AM MST Mike Parker via
Digitalmars-d- announce wrote:
DIP 1015, "Deprecation and removal of implicit conversion from
integer and character literals to bool, has been rejected,
primarily on
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 15:03:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 09:45:14 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
The TL;DR is that the DIP is trying to change behavior that is
working as intended.
I thought the whole point of a DIP is to change behavior that
is working as
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 09:45:14 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
The TL;DR is that the DIP is trying to change behavior that is
working as intended.
I thought the whole point of a DIP is to change behavior that is
working as intended. Otherwise, we have a bug fix rather than a
language
That's strange, I thought polysemous literals prefer default
type, not tightest type.
---
auto b=1;
static assert(is(typeof(b)==bool));
---
Error: static assert: is(int == bool) is false
On 13/11/2018 12:12 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2018-11-12 03:37, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/11/2018 3:58 PM, Mike Franklin wrote:
This is a significant milestone. Congratulations, Walter!
Many people helped out with this, too.
There are still a few .c files in
On 2018-11-12 00:40, Walter Bright wrote:
As:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8946
removes the header files for the old C++ code!
BTW, this is great news :)
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2018-11-12 03:37, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/11/2018 3:58 PM, Mike Franklin wrote:
This is a significant milestone. Congratulations, Walter!
Many people helped out with this, too.
There are still a few .c files in
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/tree/master/src/dmd/backend, so what's
the
On 2018-11-12 10:45, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1015, "Deprecation and removal of implicit conversion from integer
and character literals to bool, has been rejected, primarily on the
grounds that it is factually incorrect in treating bool as a type
distinct from other integral types.
The TL;DR is
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 10:55:04 UTC, Dave wrote:
Could you please elaborate a bit on your workflow for D with
Vim? E.g. what do you use for debugging, refactoring, ... ?
I had a lot of functions looking like this
void chart_axis_set_name(lxw_chart_axis* handle, const(char)*
On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 10:05:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
I was hoping that this DIP was convincing enough, and its
failure is certainly disappointing.
Indeed.
On Sunday, 11 November 2018 at 23:40:16 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
As:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8946
removes the header files for the old C++ code!
This makes me happy.
On Monday, November 12, 2018 2:45:14 AM MST Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-
announce wrote:
> DIP 1015, "Deprecation and removal of implicit conversion from
> integer and character literals to bool, has been rejected,
> primarily on the grounds that it is factually incorrect in
> treating bool as a
DIP 1015, "Deprecation and removal of implicit conversion from
integer and character literals to bool, has been rejected,
primarily on the grounds that it is factually incorrect in
treating bool as a type distinct from other integral types.
The TL;DR is that the DIP is trying to change
41 matches
Mail list logo
