On 08/21/2012 05:52 PM, maarten van damme wrote:
> On 08/20/2012 11:49 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:> On 08/20/2012 10:43 PM,
maarten van damme wrote:
Still it comes nowhere near beating timons solution. Is the logic of
that documented somewhere because I don't understand it.
Try this:
http://dpast
On Tuesday, 21 August 2012 at 15:55:08 UTC, maarten van damme
wrote:
Thank you very much, this makes everything more clearer. I'm
not very familiar with binary operators so the comments help
out a lot. Would you mind it if I shamelessly copy your
solution of using shorts to store possibilities
On Tuesday, August 21, 2012 19:05:45 Andrew Spott wrote:
> When I'm doing an anonymous function for something like reduce,
> how are the arguments determined? Is it alphabetical? Can I use
> any names (reduce!"d-c"(R)?), or are the names defined in the
> function "reduce"?
>
> This syntax isn't re
Andrew Spott:
If I want to use external variables, do I have to do something
like:
int a = 1;
reduce!((int c, int d) => d - c - a)(R);
instead?
Right.
Bye,
bearophile
On 08/21/2012 07:05 PM, Andrew Spott wrote:
When I'm doing an anonymous function for something like reduce,
how are the arguments determined? Is it alphabetical? Can I use
any names (reduce!"d-c"(R)?), or are the names defined in the
function "reduce"?
They are defined here:
http://dlang.org/
On Tuesday, 21 August 2012 at 17:05:46 UTC, Andrew Spott wrote:
When I'm doing an anonymous function for something like reduce,
how are the arguments determined? Is it alphabetical? Can I
use
any names (reduce!"d-c"(R)?), or are the names defined in the
function "reduce"?
This syntax isn't r
When I'm doing an anonymous function for something like reduce,
how are the arguments determined? Is it alphabetical? Can I use
any names (reduce!"d-c"(R)?), or are the names defined in the
function "reduce"?
This syntax isn't really documented at all in the language
reference, which makes it a
2012/8/17, Chris Cain :
>
> Gonna chime in a bit here:
>
> There's a lot of factors at play when deciding to use shorts vs
> bytes vs native-sized ints. The best way to decide is to time all
> of them and see which works best overall.
>
> With caching on a larger problem, I'd guess that the smaller
demangle is currently designed to demangle functions names,
while the strings above are types. During parsing, demangle
sees the string as a qualified name and then expects a type,
and when it doesn't find one it figures the symbol isn't valid.
It sounds like we either need a separate function
On Tuesday, 21 August 2012 at 06:52:56 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-08-21 04:30, Carl Sturtivant wrote:
Hmmn, that's odd, now Sean Kelly's reply has vanished from
this thread,
along with my reply to it, but my original post has reappeared.
(Previously that vanished when Sean replied.)
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 21:03:25 +0100, David wrote:
You could define a custom ExitException and throw that, catching it at
the top level and returning the error code stored inside it, from
main(). Not ideal, but it would work.
Thi is really not ideal
Didn't I just say that.. :p
"Not ideal, b
On 20.08.2012 00:43, jicman wrote:
Greetings.
I am trying to pass a (I think) dchar value to a Windows COM
function and it does not work. Imagine this situation...
dchar test()
{
dchar val = 0x;
return val
}
void main()
{
...lots of code excluded
SomeWindowsComCall(test);
On 20.08.2012 18:22, jicman wrote:
...
dchar GetSourceLanguageEnumaration(char[] lang)
{
// *** STaggerF.SourceLanguage Enumeration ***
dchar sl = 0x;
lang = std.string.tolower(lang);
//msgBox(lang);
switch(lang)
{
case "sq", "sq-al": // stfTargetLanguageAlbania
13 matches
Mail list logo
