On Friday, June 08, 2018 03:51:11 David Bennett via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Thursday, 7 June 2018 at 04:58:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > It would be trivial enough to create a wrapper template so that
> > you can do something like
> >
> > immutable n = ctfe!(foo());
> >
> > e.g.
> >
On Friday, 8 June 2018 at 17:09:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I would, if I had the time to spare to make such a chart.
Perhaps you (or somebody here) could do it? It *is* a wiki,
after all. Y'all don't have to wait for me to get around to
it, the edit button is right there.
T
Fair
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 02:57:26PM +, jmh530 via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
[...]
> May I suggest that you add a flow chart that gives a very high level
> understanding of the compiler steps. Like how Rust's introduction to
> MIR has:
> https://blog.rust-lang.org/2016/04/19/MIR.html
I would,
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 02:36:01PM +, Gopan via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Friday, 8 June 2018 at 05:10:16 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > All this talk of CTFE and "compile-time", along with the confusion
> > that arises from conflating everything done by the compiler into the
> > blanket
On Friday, 8 June 2018 at 05:10:16 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
All this talk of CTFE and "compile-time", along with the
confusion that arises from conflating everything done by the
compiler into the blanket term "compile-time" makes me want to
scream:
On Friday, 8 June 2018 at 05:10:16 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
All this talk of CTFE and "compile-time", along with the
confusion that arises from conflating everything done by the
compiler into the blanket term "compile-time" makes me want to
scream:
All this talk of CTFE and "compile-time", along with the confusion that
arises from conflating everything done by the compiler into the blanket
term "compile-time" makes me want to scream:
https://wiki.dlang.org/User:Quickfur/Compile-time_vs._compile-time
;-)
tl;dr: D's "compile-time"
On Thursday, 7 June 2018 at 04:58:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
It would be trivial enough to create a wrapper template so that
you can do something like
immutable n = ctfe!(foo());
e.g.
template ctfe(alias value)
{
enum ctfe = value;
}
Would this be equivalent to using static
On Thursday, June 07, 2018 11:31:13 jmh530 via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Wednesday, 6 June 2018 at 22:19:58 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 06, 2018 18:18:16 jmh530 via
> >
> > Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> >> On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 03:18:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 June 2018 at 22:19:58 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Wednesday, June 06, 2018 18:18:16 jmh530 via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 03:18:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> [snip]
>
> If you haven't yet, I'd suggest reading
Would make a good blog series?
On Thursday, June 07, 2018 04:41:35 Gopan via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 22:08:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 18:00:05 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
> >
> > wrote:
> >> No, it's definitely a bug. main is not being evaluated at
> >> compile time.
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 22:08:32 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 18:00:05 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
No, it's definitely a bug. main is not being evaluated at
compile time. The real result of this function should be a
compile-time error -- __ctfe is a *runtime*
On Wednesday, June 06, 2018 18:18:16 jmh530 via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 03:18:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > If you haven't yet, I'd suggest reading
>
> Would make a good blog series?
What would make a good blog series? Something talking about
On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 03:18:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[snip]
If you haven't yet, I'd suggest reading
Would make a good blog series?
On Tuesday, June 05, 2018 22:08:32 Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 18:00:05 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
>
> wrote:
> > No, it's definitely a bug. main is not being evaluated at
> > compile time. The real result of this function should be a
> > compile-time
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 18:00:05 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
No, it's definitely a bug. main is not being evaluated at
compile time. The real result of this function should be a
compile-time error -- __ctfe is a *runtime* value that is
always defined based on whether you are __ctfe
On 6/5/18 12:10 PM, Stefan Koch wrote:
This is not bug just not very intuitive.
Since you are declaring a static array the value of n needs to known at
compiletime.
so it'll try to evaluate n at an compile-time context in which n is 1.
however when code-generation for the function is done
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 13:27:35 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 6/5/18 6:40 AM, Simen Kjærås wrote:
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 09:36:22 UTC, Gopan wrote:
void main()
{
immutable n = __ctfe ? 1 : 2;
int[n] a;
assert(a.length == n); // fails, wat
}
That's gotta be a bug -
On 6/5/18 6:40 AM, Simen Kjærås wrote:
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 09:36:22 UTC, Gopan wrote:
void main()
{
immutable n = __ctfe ? 1 : 2;
int[n] a;
assert(a.length == n); // fails, wat
}
That's gotta be a bug - that should give a 'variable n cannot be read at
compile time' error.
On Tuesday, June 05, 2018 11:18:05 Gopan via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 10:40:20 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 09:36:22 UTC, Gopan wrote:
> >> void main()
> >> {
> >>
> >> immutable n = __ctfe ? 1 : 2;
> >> int[n] a;
> >>
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 10:40:20 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 09:36:22 UTC, Gopan wrote:
void main()
{
immutable n = __ctfe ? 1 : 2;
int[n] a;
assert(a.length == n); // fails, wat
}
That's gotta be a bug - that should give a 'variable n cannot
be read at
On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 09:36:22 UTC, Gopan wrote:
void main()
{
immutable n = __ctfe ? 1 : 2;
int[n] a;
assert(a.length == n); // fails, wat
}
That's gotta be a bug - that should give a 'variable n cannot be
read at compile time' error. The fact that n is immutable
shouldn't
On Sunday, 3 June 2018 at 21:32:06 UTC, gdelazzari wrote:
Couldn't a keyword like "ctfe" (just making it up right now)
exist? So that, when seeing something like
ctfe myNumber = 5;
ctfe if (myNumber + 2 == 7)
{
// ...
}
one could immediately understand that the code is
executed/evaluated
On Monday, June 04, 2018 14:05:28 gdelazzari via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 03:18:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > So, while static _seems_ somewhat inconsistent at first, the
> > way it's used is pretty consistent overall. The main
> > inconsistency is the places
On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 03:18:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I think that part of your problem here comes from the fact that
you think of enum or static are "CTFE keywords." That's not
what they are at all. Yes, they can trigger CTFE, but they're
not the only way.
...
Thank you very
On Sunday, June 03, 2018 21:32:06 gdelazzari via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> Hello everyone, I'm new here on the forum but I've been exploring
> D for quite a while. I'm not an expert programmer by any means,
> so this one may be a really silly question and, in that case,
> please forgive me.
>
>
On Sunday, 3 June 2018 at 21:32:06 UTC, gdelazzari wrote:
Note that this is not an attack to the language or anything (I
actually really love it), I'm just trying to understand the
reasoning behind this choice.
Because they have a thing about not adding new keywords,
apparently it's more
On Sunday, 3 June 2018 at 21:32:06 UTC, gdelazzari wrote:
I'm trying to understand why
keywords such as "static" or "enum" are used to denote compile
time "things". What I mean is that those keywords are also used
for other purposes, so I find it a bit confusing. Couldn't a
keyword like "ctfe"
Hello everyone, I'm new here on the forum but I've been exploring
D for quite a while. I'm not an expert programmer by any means,
so this one may be a really silly question and, in that case,
please forgive me.
With the premise that I've still not looked a lot into "complex"
compile time
29 matches
Mail list logo
