On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 09:50:15 +, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Tuesday, 9 June 2015 at 05:39:06 UTC, Timothee Cour wrote:
I'd be very interested in reading more about those reasons beyond FUD.
The arguments in favor have been repeated many times over, and the only
argument against that I've heard
On Tuesday, 9 June 2015 at 05:39:06 UTC, Timothee Cour wrote:
I'd be very interested in reading more about those reasons
beyond FUD.
The arguments in favor have been repeated many times over, and
the only
argument against that I've heard ('overloading and named
arguments do not
play well
On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 20:11:31 UTC, Oleg B wrote:
On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 13:37:40 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 12:24:56 UTC, Oleg B wrote:
I guess you should follow andrei's post about new allocators!
Can you get link to this post?
These are some of his posts:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 20:32:56 -0700, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
is, but personally, I think that named arguments are a terrible idea in
general, so I'm not about to try and support a position that tries to
bring them into D.
it's a perfect thing. i always hate that Flag
On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 22:58:10 -0700, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Personally, I hate how named arguments affect the API (e.g. the names of
the parameters suddenly become part of the API), and for the most part,
the only times that they're worth much is when you have so many
On 27/04/2015 10:41, ketmar wrote:
snip
i believe this has something to do with exception frames. but it needs
further investigation.
What is an exception frame, exactly?
Moreover, are these frames applicable even in sections of code where no throwing or
catching of exceptions takes place?
On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 11:57:03 +0100, Stewart Gordon wrote:
On 27/04/2015 10:41, ketmar wrote:
snip
i believe this has something to do with exception frames. but it needs
further investigation.
What is an exception frame, exactly?
to correctly do unwinding and other interesting things
Hello. In object.di rt_finalize calls for class objects in
destroy func.
I not found it in dmd source on github and not found in druntime
sources.
I think rt_finalize must call dtors for object and base classes,
but I think that's not all. Or if it all has it code logic
problems?
void
I found it
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/blob/master/src/rt/lifetime.d#L1350
Creates new questions.
Why it's extern(C)?
What must do collectHandler function?
If I understand correctly monitor relates to multithreading
control (Mutex?).
On Sunday, 7 June 2015 at 15:20:17 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
/* Some function that generates an AA */
Thanks. Beautiful code, but I want a little more :)
/* Some function that generates an AA */
int[][int][int] initHash(int i)
{
/* It is nice to see that this function is not called at run
On Wednesday, 10 June 2015 at 03:38:32 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
The way I understand it and the way it makes sense to me, :)
variables that are generated at compile time can be initialized
only once. It is not possible after initialization. However,
the initialization of the variable can be as
On 06/09/2015 06:53 PM, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
ctHash[4][4] ~= [4, 4]; // I want this to work at compile time :)
// Possible?
It is possible but not exactly as you wrote. In other words, it is not
as flexible.
The way I understand it and the way it makes sense to me, :) variables
12 matches
Mail list logo
