But... why Javascript hurts you that much? What did it do to you?
Yesterday, I was on digitalmars.com, browsing the archive for the D
newsgroup. Actually, I just had it open in a tab, and was actively
browsing another website. I wondered why the browser had such a bad
response. Finally, I
Daniel Keep wrote:
Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
David Ferenczi Wrote:
I'm glad to see this release and the progress of qtd!
Coudl you please provide a link to the tutrial? Many thanks!
Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
It didn't take very long after previous post to make a first
implementation of
Do I see correctly, that you didn't need to introduce a MOC compiler for
D? And that the Signal and Slots implementation is written in pure D?
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Eldar Insafutdinov
e.insafutdi...@gmail.com wrote:
The reason why is this file is big is in this bug
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=282 And I don't thing that
placing enums outside the class is a good idea, because
Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
We faced a bug that module static constructors don't work with cyclic
imports. Currently it's fixed with a dirty hack which is not really
acceptable. Is there any chance for this to be fixed?
IMO it is the cyclic import that is the bug ;)
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Michel Fortin escribió:
On 2009-03-06 14:35:59 -0500, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com said:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Can't live without bitfields! Give me bitfields and I'll lift the
Earth!
Here they are, std.bitmanip. Well-defined and more portable and
BCS wrote:
Reply to Walter,
http://www.reddit.com/r/d_language/comments/838lf/cristian_vlasceanu_a
nd_d_for_the_net_platform/
His comments on array slicing are interesting.
Seems to me the solution should be to have *all* dynamic arrays be
ArraySegment as all dynamic arrays under DMD are
Yay!
But every time you give, we demand more. Where's dmd for 64 bit platforms?
No!
rant
toString() is one of the most dreadful features in D. Trying to slightly
improve it is a waste of time -- the whole concept needs to be redone.
It's horribly inflexible, tedious, and hugely inefficient. What more
could there be to hate?
Hey, it's only meant for debugging! (At least I
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Yes. The way it should be is not with sink, but with the standard
output iterator method put().
void streamOut(T, R)(T object, R range)
{
foreach(x; a) range.put(x);
range.put(b);
range.put(c);
}
Eh. Is a sink callback too simple
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Yes. The way it should be is not with sink, but with the standard
output iterator method put().
void streamOut(T, R)(T object, R range)
{
foreach(x; a) range.put(x);
range.put(b);
range.put(c
Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
grauzone wrote:
void streamOut(T, R)(T object, R range)
{
foreach(x; a) range.put(x);
range.put(b);
range.put(c);
}
So, um... what is a b c and T object?
In my opinion, this is a confusing example. I believe it was meant to be:
void streamOut(T, R)(T
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
Do note that I might have misinterpreted it all, as Andrei's code
would not do what I have outlined above, I only feel it makes the
most sense.
Yeah OK, but what about virtual functions? Not having it virtual is a
real
* added .typeinfo to ClassInfo
Very nice. Maybe I can go remove some hacks from my code now...
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtYCFVPfx4M
How about posting a link to something everyone can play? Like an actual
video file?
Thank you.
BCS wrote:
Reply to Ary,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtYCFVPfx4M
The clunk you just heard is my jaw bouncing on the floor G NICE!
It would be very nice to have such a debugging feature. Too bad it's
hardcoded into a very bug GUI system.
Even if I spent hours configuring Eclipse
It would be very nice to have such a debugging feature. Too bad it's
hardcoded into a very bug GUI system.
I meant to write big, not bug. Talk about Freudian Slips!
Daniel Keep wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Saaa wrote:
grauzone n...@example.net wrote in message
news:gv4p44$1jq...@digitalmars.com...
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtYCFVPfx4M
How about posting a link to something everyone can play? Like an
actual video file?
Thank you
Yes, heaven forbid Ary spends his time adding and improving features
when he should be building a new editor from the ground up.
That's not what I'm saying. First, he's free to do with his time
whatever he chooses to. Second, I think it'd be better to decouple
debugger and editor. For
Give me a break. You guys act like it's a fucking affront to your
religion to have to use Flash or Youtube.
Sorry for complaining about the necessity to be forced to install an
annoying, crappy, utterly obnoxious plugin like Flash, that barely adds
functionality to anything, but instead
browsers. What's the big deal everyone have with Javascript?
It's unnecessary, annoying, slower, and adds security holes.
When using Firefox, I usually use NoScript to block all scripts by
default. Sometimes, some minor things don't work, and I have to enable
JS. Now it's really rare to see
Adblock is essential. Most ads have gotten so completely out-of-hand, I
seriously wouldn't even be using the web anymore if it weren't for Adblock.
Definitely. It's also useful for blocking other obnoxious stuff like
emoticons or avatars in those phpBB forums.
IIRC, I think NoScript does let
What browser are you *using*?
Firefox. But I often use Konqueror for serious work (!= entertainment,
wasting time). With Konqueror, some sites become dead slow with Java
Script enabled. Oh, and although Konqueror is a very nice browser,
scripting often causes malfunctions. That all just
to get a new machine? They're like $12 now.
Where can I buy 12$ computers?
Saaa wrote:
My only concern with NoScript is, enabling a site reloads all tabs
containing a script from that site. Oh, and by default, it shows some sort
of GUI animation when loading a site with blocked scripts. But you can
disable it.
As you can disable the reloading ;)
Thanks.
And going
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 5:12 PM, grauzone n...@example.net wrote:
to get a new machine? They're like $12 now.
Where can I buy 12$ computers?
lern2hyperbole.
Needing brand new PC hardware for using heavy websites is not really
an exaggeration, though. As soon
Alexander Pánek wrote:
grauzone wrote:
browsers. What's the big deal everyone have with Javascript?
It's unnecessary, annoying, slower, and adds security holes.
When using Firefox, I usually use NoScript to block all scripts by
default. Sometimes, some minor things don't work, and I have
Alexander Pánek wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Alexander Pánek wrote:
grauzone wrote:
browsers. What's the big deal everyone have with Javascript?
It's unnecessary, annoying, slower, and adds security holes.
When using Firefox, I usually use NoScript to block all scripts by
default. Sometimes
BCS wrote:
the latest and greatest:
http://arrayboundserror.blogspot.com/2009/06/serialization-for-d-part-6-of-n.html
This time I'm hoping for some feedback on how people want to interface
with 3rd party types.
Is there any real reason for all those mixins?
Is there any real reason for all those mixins?
which ones?
All used by the user. That would be Serializable and SerializableRecuring.
BCS wrote:
Reply to grauzone,
Is there any real reason for all those mixins?
which ones?
All used by the user. That would be Serializable and
SerializableRecuring.
What else would you use? I guess if I really wanted to I could use the
same device as for 3rd party types, but that just
tupleof _can_ access private members, even if the type is from a
different module than the function that uses the tupleof. This changed
somewhere between dmd 1.030 and 1.040, I think.
If it can, I would consider that a bug.
It would be nice to get an official statement.
And even if Walter
BCS wrote:
That's why I'd still require types to be marked as serializeable by
the programmer.
How would you do that aside from mixins?
Make the user implement a marker interface, or let him provide a
(single) special class member which fulfill the same function, or
introduce annotations
BCS wrote:
introduce annotations into the language.
NO, not an option.
What, why? Sure, this is not a realistic option.
Well, I can switch the default but, in my experience, most of the time
repetition doesn't matter. I also dissagree on the relatively useless
Oh really?
optimization
BCS wrote:
Well, I can switch the default but, in my experience, most of the
time repetition doesn't matter. I also dissagree on the relatively
useless
Oh really?
I haven't used a graph data structure in some time. Most of them have
been trees. And the cases I can think of, the repeated
Huh? You can simple cast the interface to an object.
That is not safe. not all interface instances are D objects.
There are people who care for COM and C++ interfaces? COM is Windows
specific, and C++ vtables are... uh, I don't know,
platform/architecture/compiler vendor specific?
In any
BCS wrote:
The demarshaller function is indexed via a string derived from the
original object. What would the marshaller function key on? The best I
can think of right now is the typeinfo and as of now, that's broken
under DLLs
DLLs are broken in general. There are many more problems
BCS wrote:
Reply to grauzone,
BCS wrote:
The demarshaller function is indexed via a string derived from the
original object. What would the marshaller function key on? The best
I can think of right now is the typeinfo and as of now, that's broken
under DLLs
DLLs are broken in general
Walter Bright wrote:
のしいか (noshiika) wrote:
Thank you for the great work, Walter and all the other contributors.
But I am a bit disappointed with the CaseRangeStatement syntax.
Why is it
case 0: .. case 9:
instead of
case 0 .. 9:
Or
case [0..10]:
?
Compatible to how list slicing
Tim Matthews wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
のしいか (noshiika) wrote:
Thank you for the great work, Walter and all the other contributors.
But I am a bit disappointed with the CaseRangeStatement syntax.
Why is it
case 0: .. case 9:
instead of
case 0 .. 9:
Or
case [0..10
You are just saying it's ugly. I don't think it's ugly. Walter doesn't
think it's ugly. Other people don't think it's ugly. Many of the people
who said it's ugly actually came up with proposals that are arguably
ugly, hopelessly confusing, or both. Look at only some of the rehashed
proposals
In any way, I think we should completely redesign the switch statement
and give it a different syntax. No more C compatibility. No more Duff's
device. We can keep the old switch statement for that.
PS: we could add awesome stuff like pattern matching to this, which
would make D much more
I use ff. looks ok to me.
Maybe your just using a tiny resolution?
(does anybody use less than 1680x1050 these days?)
I don't think you should design your website in such a way, that only
users with specific hardware can view it.
Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
I've been asked for my runtime crash handler with it's CodeView reader earlier
in digitalmars.D so here it is:
http://jump.fm/UVYHG
Wanted to take a look at it again, but the site is defunct.
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Lutger wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Don wrote:
It's pretty standard, though. For example, there are some bugs which
Visual C++ detects only when the optimiser is on. From memory, they
Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:54:22 +0400, grauzone n...@example.net wrote:
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Lutger wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Don wrote:
It's pretty standard, though. For example
Walter Bright wrote:
Anyhow, during this process I stumbled upon what the problem was.
Optlink was apparently trying to account for some Borland obscure
extension to the OMF. Remove this, and it works, although presumably it
will no longer link Borland object files (who cares!).
And during
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
grauzone, el 4 de noviembre a las 17:23 me escribiste:
Walter Bright wrote:
Anyhow, during this process I stumbled upon what the problem was.
Optlink was apparently trying to account for some Borland obscure
extension to the OMF. Remove this, and it works, although
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 11/10/09 01:27, Bill Baxter wrote:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Looks like Bill Baxter is giving a presentation on D Nov. 18!
http
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Don wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
grauzone wrote:
You're not testing for types, you're testing if it compiles. Inside
the tested block of code, all sorts of things could go wrong. You
can't know if is(typeof(...)) really did what you wanted
retard wrote:
Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:00:58 +0100, grauzone wrote:
Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
It's been some time since I last posted to this newsgroup, I've been
quite busy these past weeks!
Among other things, I started writing an IDE for D from scratch and
opened a SourceForge project
Walter Bright wrote:
Happy New Year!
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.054.zip
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.038.zip
Many thanks to the numerous people who contributed to this update.
Tons of
bearophile wrote:
grauzone:
But I have a problem: the compiler is either extremely slow for me, or
is stuck in an endless loop. All it does is to slowly allocate memory. I
aborted the compilation after ~ 20 minutes and 2 GB RAM allocation. This
wasn't the case with dmd 1.053, where it only
Walter Bright wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Why are you creating these as mailing lists and not as
news.digitalmars.com groups?
Because I expect it to be very low traffic, and I wouldn't expect
people to constantly have to check the n.g. to see if the beta is
available
BLS wrote:
On 30/01/2010 08:13, Walter Bright wrote:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.056.zip
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.040.zip
Thanks to the many people who contributed to this update!
Trass3r wrote:
The linux version comes in the zip right along side dmd.
Indeed. Even the OSX folder contains obj2asm. The windows version is missing.
The best thing is, on Linux you can use binutils objdump just fine. I'm
sure OSX has tools to inspect object files as well. Only on Windows,
Robert Jacques wrote:
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:42:54 -0500, Philippe Sigaud
philippe.sig...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 14:22, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.comwrote:
The shrinkToFit name is not my favorite, anyone care to submit a better
name? minimize is out because it
Walter Bright wrote:
Trass3r wrote:
obj2asm tells the tale. (obj2asm is an incredibly useful tool, I
don't know why nobody uses it.)
Maybe because it's not free (and not much advertised). obconv also
supports disassembling various object file formats + conversion
between them and it's open
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
If a good debugger existed for dmd, you could determine the location,
but I don't know of any good ones. gdb doesn't do a very good job with D.
dmd has produced debugging information that makes gdb choke up for ages.
This makes gdb (and some other utilities that
59 matches
Mail list logo
