Hello D-istos,
I am currenty implementing a kind of lexing toolkit. First time I do that.
Below are design questions on the topic. Also, I would like to know whether you
think such a module would be useful for th community od D programmers. And for
which advantages, knowing that D directly
Hello,
Here are three little issues I faced while implemented a lexing toolkit (see
other post).
1. Regex match
Let us say there are three natures or modes of lexeme:
* SKIP: not even kept, just matched and dropped (eg optional spacing)
* MARK: kept, but slice is irrelevant data (eg all
Greetings
Is there a limit on the maximum number of threads that can be
spawned? Or does it just depend on the value in
/proc/sys/kernel/threads-max on a linux system?
Regards
- Cherry
spir:
2. reference escape
3. implicite deref
The situation is easy to understand once you know how generally what a stack
frame is and how C functions are called:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stack_frame
The D call stack is a contiguous-allocated backwards-single-linked list of
scottrick Wrote:
T[] rawRead(T)(T[] buffer);
I understand that T is generic type, but I am not sure of the
meaning of the (T) after the method name.
That T is defining the symbol to represent the generic type. It can have more
than one and D provides other things like aliases... Another
On 02/06/2011 02:13 PM, bearophile wrote:
Before a D function starts, a stack frame is created. It will contain your
stack-allocated struct instance. When the function ends its stack frame is
destroyed virtually by moving a stack pointer, so the struct may be overwritten
by other things, like
spir:
But this does not explain why the compiler refuses:
// 1
auto s = S(data);
return s;
and accepts:
// 2
return (S(data));
or does it?
Accepting the second is a bug in the escape analysis done by the front-end, I
think.
But see also what Walter has
Are debug symbols compiled with -gc stored in a separate file? Visual Studio
refuses to debug my things, and windbg seems to be remarkably unhelpful.
Thanks, your post was very helpful. Two more questions (probably
related):
Where is the function 'format' defined? Also, what is that 'unittest'
block? It compiles fine as is, but if I refer to format outside of
unittest, it will not compile. Also, if I compile and run your
example, it
scottrick:
Where is the function 'format' defined?
You need to add at the top of the module:
import std.conv: format;
Or:
import std.conv;
Also, what is that 'unittest' block? It compiles fine as is, but if I refer
to format outside of
unittest, it will not compile. Also, if I compile
... doesn't work.
class C {}
thisTid.send(new immutable(C)());
receive((immutable C) { writeln(got it!); });
This throws:
core.exception.AssertError@/usr/include/d/dmd/phobos/std/variant.d(285):
immutable(C)
And when I go for Rebindable, I get Aliases to mutable thread-local data not
Are debug symbols compiled with -gc stored in a separate file? Visual
Studio refuses to debug my things
Nope.
Plus you need to use cv2pdb to debug with Visual
Am 06.02.2011 19:38, schrieb Jesse Phillips:
scottrick Wrote:
T[] rawRead(T)(T[] buffer);
I understand that T is generic type, but I am not sure of the
meaning of the (T) after the method name.
That T is defining the symbol to represent the generic type. It can have more
than one and D
On 06/02/11 20:29, Sean Eskapp wrote:
Are debug symbols compiled with -gc stored in a separate file? Visual Studio
refuses to debug my things, and windbg seems to be remarkably unhelpful.
I suggest you take a look at VisualD if you're using visual studio, it
will handle converting debug info
== Quote from Robert Clipsham (rob...@octarineparrot.com)'s article
On 06/02/11 20:29, Sean Eskapp wrote:
Are debug symbols compiled with -gc stored in a separate file? Visual Studio
refuses to debug my things, and windbg seems to be remarkably unhelpful.
I suggest you take a look at VisualD
On Sunday 06 February 2011 05:05:24 d coder wrote:
Greetings
Is there a limit on the maximum number of threads that can be
spawned? Or does it just depend on the value in
/proc/sys/kernel/threads-max on a linux system?
Barring any bugs which manage to keep threads alive too long, it's
On Sunday 06 February 2011 13:55:36 Tomek Sowiński wrote:
... doesn't work.
class C {}
thisTid.send(new immutable(C)());
receive((immutable C) { writeln(got it!); });
This throws:
core.exception.AssertError@/usr/include/d/dmd/phobos/std/variant.d(285):
immutable(C)
And when I go for
Hi there,
i'm all new to D but not new to programming in general.
I'd like to try D but i didn't find a nice tutorial yet.
I don't want to read a whole book, I just want to get the basics so I can start.
Can you help me find something like that?
Best regards, Julius
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Julius n0r3...@web.de wrote:
Hi there,
i'm all new to D but not new to programming in general.
I'd like to try D but i didn't find a nice tutorial yet.
I don't want to read a whole book, I just want to get the basics so I can
start.
Can you help me find
On 2011-02-06 16:55:36 -0500, Tomek Sowiński j...@ask.me said:
... doesn't work.
class C {}
thisTid.send(new immutable(C)());
receive((immutable C) { writeln(got it!); });
This throws:
core.exception.AssertError@/usr/include/d/dmd/phobos/std/variant.d(285):
immutable(C)
And when I go for
On 2011-02-06 20:09:56 -0500, Michel Fortin michel.for...@michelf.com said:
I just made this pull request today:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/
That should have been:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3
--
Michel Fortin
michel.for...@michelf.com
Hi,
I was wondering, why are we allowed to omit parentheses when calling functions
with no arguments, when they are not @properties? Is there a good reason for
relaxing the language rules like this?
Thanks!
On Sunday 06 February 2011 20:38:29 %u wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering, why are we allowed to omit parentheses when calling
functions with no arguments, when they are not @properties? Is there a
good reason for relaxing the language rules like this?
Because the compiler is not in line with TDPL
%u wfunct...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering, why are we allowed to omit parentheses when calling
functions
with no arguments, when they are not @properties? Is there a good reason
for
relaxing the language rules like this?
This behavior is deprecated, but other features have had
All right, found out how to make it compile. There are two ways:
1) Using DMD for the D part, DMC for the C part and combining them. This is
the batch file I use for that:
dmd -c -lib dpart.d
dmc cpart.c dpart.lib phobos.lib
2) Using DMD for the D part, DMC for the C part, DMD for combining
Hmm, no, it won't work right on Linux for some reason. This is the output:
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.3.2/../../../libphobos2.a(deh2_4e7_525.o): In
function `_D2rt4deh213__eh_finddataFPvZPS2rt4deh213DHandlerTable':
26 matches
Mail list logo
