On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 09:46:56 UTC, JDemler wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 05:52:00 UTC, ketmar wrote:
oh, seems that i managed to make everything even less
understandable...
Your code works perfectly and makes at least some sense to me.
Thank you.
If i understand it correctly:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 10:10:51 UTC, ketmar wrote:
i.e. when it need a value in compile time. the interpreter is
invoked, it evaluates (interprets) the given code (function or
template instantiation), and then it returns result (or raises
an error).
One important thing I didn't see
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 10:29:08 +, anonymous wrote:
One important thing I didn't see stated clearly by anyone in here:
CTFE may run at compile time but it follows the same rules as run time
evaluation (plus some restrictions).
This means, you can't use dynamic values (e.g. function
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 09:46:54 +, JDemler wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 05:52:00 UTC, ketmar wrote:
oh, seems that i managed to make everything even less understandable...
Your code works perfectly and makes at least some sense to me.
Thank you.
If i understand it correctly:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 07:28:39 UTC, anonymous wrote:
To come back to destructors and immutable objects:
Even without the default initialized variables issue it is
possible to modify immutable data:
struct S {
int[] bar;
~this() {
bar[0] = 123;
}
}
void foo(immutable(int[])
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 10:29:09 UTC, anonymous wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 10:10:51 UTC, ketmar wrote:
i.e. when it need a value in compile time. the interpreter is
invoked, it evaluates (interprets) the given code (function or
template instantiation), and then it returns result (or
You can use @property there, but you don't have to because you
can call it with optional parenthesis anyway.
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 12:36:43 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
You can use @property there, but you don't have to because you
can call it with optional parenthesis anyway.
Thanks.
Is there a good reference for the current state of @property?
I know it was hotly debated for awhile (and maybe
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 06:12:30 UTC, Ozan wrote:
Hallo!
Is it possible to create arrays which has more then one type,
f. ex. array[0] = 1; array[1] = z; array[2] = new clazz(),
I tried Variant, but it slow down heavily my app.
Greetings,
Ozan
You can try Algebraic instead (also
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 10:41:24 UTC, JDemler wrote:
So if i want to use parameters in a static context at compile
time i have to pass them as template parameters?
Yes, template parameters are fine.
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 12:35:44 UTC, Robert M. Münch wrote:
Hi, just to x-check if I have the correct understanding:
fibers = look parallel, are sequential = use 1 CPU core
threads = look parallel, are parallel = use several CPU cores
Is that right?
Pretty much.
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 05:52:00 UTC, ketmar wrote:
oh, seems that i managed to make everything even less
understandable...
Your code works perfectly and makes at least some sense to me.
Thank you.
If i understand it correctly: __traits-time =
templateinstatiation-time = pragma-time
Suppose I have a function defined like so:
void foo(int i) { }
intended to be called like:
5.foo
Should it be labeled with @property?
Or is @property only for true member functions?
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 12:53:43 UTC, rcorre wrote:
Is there a good reference for the current state of @property?
Easy: it does absolutely nothing right now.
I'm just never sure when I should be using it (if at all).
You should really only use it when you know the function is
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 10:04:35 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 09:46:56 UTC, JDemler wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 05:52:00 UTC, ketmar wrote:
oh, seems that i managed to make everything even less
understandable...
Your code works perfectly and makes at least some
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 10:16:24 UTC, JDemler wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 10:04:35 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
[...]
If that is the case then i really do not get why my first
example compiles and my second does not.
The compiler sees the pragma(msg, test(e)) and runs test(e).
If test
p.s. faster weak typing solution is definitely possible if you'll narrow
possible type set. but as i said, i'd not recommend to go this way. there
can be dragon in the end.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 06/13/2015 11:12 PM, Ozan wrote:
Hallo!
Is it possible to create arrays which has more then one type,
Not possible.
f. ex. array[0] = 1; array[1] = z; array[2] = new clazz(),
I tried Variant, but it slow down heavily my app.
Another option is OOP. Depending on the way they are
To come back to destructors and immutable objects:
Even without the default initialized variables issue it is
possible to modify immutable data:
struct S {
int[] bar;
~this() {
bar[0] = 123;
}
}
void foo(immutable(int[]) i) {
immutable(S) s = immutable S(i);
}
void main() {
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 06:12:29 +, Ozan wrote:
Hallo!
Is it possible to create arrays which has more then one type,
f. ex. array[0] = 1; array[1] = z; array[2] = new clazz(),
I tried Variant, but it slow down heavily my app.
it is possible. with Variant. ;-)
chances are that
Hallo!
Is it possible to create arrays which has more then one type,
f. ex. array[0] = 1; array[1] = z; array[2] = new clazz(),
I tried Variant, but it slow down heavily my app.
Greetings,
Ozan
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 06:12:30 UTC, Ozan wrote:
Hallo!
Is it possible to create arrays which has more then one type,
f. ex. array[0] = 1; array[1] = z; array[2] = new clazz(),
I tried Variant, but it slow down heavily my app.
Greetings,
Ozan
It's always going to be slower. To do
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 12:53:43 UTC, rcorre wrote:
Is there a good reference for the current state of @property?
I know it was hotly debated for awhile (and maybe still is?).
I'm just never sure when I should be using it (if at all).
Oh yes:
On 2015-06-14 08:35, Robert M. Münch wrote:
Hi, just to x-check if I have the correct understanding:
fibers = look parallel, are sequential = use 1 CPU core
threads = look parallel, are parallel = use several CPU cores
Is that right?
Yes, however nothing really guarantees
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 12:26:52 +, rcorre wrote:
Suppose I have a function defined like so:
void foo(int i) { }
intended to be called like:
5.foo
Should it be labeled with @property?
Or is @property only for true member functions?
only if you plan to use it like `foo = 5;`. i.e.
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 18:21:39 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
only if you plan to use it like `foo = 5;`.
You can use it like that anyway.
sure, but i'm talking about style, not about compiler demands.
i.e. exactly like field variable.
struct S{
void delegate() dg;
}
int main(){
On 06/14/2015 05:50 PM, ketmar wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 12:26:52 +, rcorre wrote:
Suppose I have a function defined like so:
void foo(int i) { }
intended to be called like:
5.foo
Should it be labeled with @property?
Or is @property only for true member functions?
only if you plan
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 12:35:44 UTC, Robert M. Münch wrote:
Hi, just to x-check if I have the correct understanding:
fibers = look parallel, are sequential = use 1 CPU core
threads = look parallel, are parallel = use several CPU cores
Is that right?
Fibers/co-routines
On Tuesday, 9 June 2015 at 14:30:24 UTC, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Shared libraries (DLLs) don't work on windows. They only work
for the simplest of all cases (e.g. global functions) and even
then there are pitfalls. Just don't do it. The only viable
option currently is to link statically or put
On Monday, 15 June 2015 at 03:53:35 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
Is it possible to apply some operation on every member of a
TypeTuple, then get the result back?
Say I have a TypeTuple of array types, and I want a TypeTuple
of their element types, how could I do that?
You can do that with
Is it possible to apply some operation on every member of a
TypeTuple, then get the result back?
Say I have a TypeTuple of array types, and I want a TypeTuple of
their element types, how could I do that?
31 matches
Mail list logo
