On 6/11/22 13:36, z wrote:
> i meant with the syntax in (1), the spec's documentation appears to say
> they are equivalent in result with `new *type*[X][Y]` form.
>
> (1) https://dlang.org/spec/expression#new_multidimensional (3. multiple
> argument form)
Thank you. I see now: The values in pare
On Saturday, 11 June 2022 at 15:01:05 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 6/11/22 00:09, z wrote:
> I rechecked and it should be `X Y Z` for static array, but `Z
Y X` for
> indexing/dynamic array creating with `new`
How so?
i meant with the syntax in (1), the spec's documentation appears
to say they
On 6/11/22 00:09, z wrote:
> I rechecked and it should be `X Y Z` for static array, but `Z Y X` for
> indexing/dynamic array creating with `new`
How so? I wrote the following program:
import std.stdio;
void main() {
enum X = 2;
enum Y = 3;
enum Z = 4;
int[X][Y][Z] s;
int[X][Y][] d =
On 6/11/22 04:16, Salih Dincer wrote:
> I think D is very consistent with our feelings. That is, the order in
> memory is in the form of rows x columns.
Yet, there are no rows or columns because neither D nor C (nor C++) have
multip-dimensional arrays. They all have arrays where elements are la
On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 17:26:48 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
I've written about this multiple times in the past but D's way
is consistent for me. That must be because I always found C's
syntax to be very illogical on this. [...]
I think so too...
I think D is very consistent with our feelings.
On Saturday, 11 June 2022 at 03:56:32 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 17:26:48 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 6/10/22 08:13, z wrote:
> arrays of arrays has different order for declaration and
addressing,
> and declaring array of arrays has different order depending
on how you
>
On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 17:26:48 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 6/10/22 08:13, z wrote:
> arrays of arrays has different order for declaration and
addressing,
> and declaring array of arrays has different order depending
on how you
> declare it and wether it's static or dynamic array, *oof*)
>
>
On 6/10/22 08:13, z wrote:
> arrays of arrays has different order for declaration and addressing,
> and declaring array of arrays has different order depending on how you
> declare it and wether it's static or dynamic array, *oof*)
>
> To give you an idea of the situation :
> ```D
> int[3][1
On 6/10/22 08:01, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> I still don't understand the reason though. The rows would be copied
> without ref but should retain their type as bool[3], a static array. (?)
Ok, now I see the very sinister problem: It is a disaster to combine
static array lambda parameters with the laz
On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 08:08:45 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
Is it somehow possible to use a struct as a [multidimensional]
array index:
D
struct indexedPair
{
size_t x, y;
}
bool isMapPassable[100][100];
auto p = indexedPair(50, 50);
if(isMapPassable[p]) return true;
Probably not
On 6/10/22 07:38, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> I played with that toString function but for some reason it prints all
> Ts. (?)
Fixed it by changing one of the lambdas to take by reference:
void toString(scope void delegate(in char[]) sink) const {
import std.algorithm;
sink.formattedWrite!"%
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 08:08:45AM +, Chris Katko via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> Is it somehow possible to use a struct as a [multidimensional] array index:
>
> D
>
> struct indexedPair
> {
> size_t x, y;
> }
>
> bool isMapPassable[100][100];
> auto
On 6/10/22 01:08, Chris Katko wrote:
> Is it somehow possible to use a struct as a [multidimensional] array
index:
You can define an opIndex that takes any index type if the array is
defined by you:
import std.stdio;
import std.format;
struct indexedPair {
size_t x, y;
}
struct MyAr
Is it somehow possible to use a struct as a [multidimensional]
array index:
D
struct indexedPair
{
size_t x, y;
}
bool isMapPassable[100][100];
auto p = indexedPair(50, 50);
if(isMapPassable[p]) return true;
Probably not, but I'm curious.
On Friday, 10 February 2017 at 09:34:39 UTC, berni wrote:
On Friday, 10 February 2017 at 09:25:04 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
Now I tried this with a named instead of a magic constant e.g.
immutable VALUE=-1;
arr.each!"a[]=VALUE";
And it doesn't work anymore. I've no clue, why... Can you
help
On Friday, 10 February 2017 at 09:25:04 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
Now I tried this with a named instead of a magic constant e.g.
immutable VALUE=-1;
arr.each!"a[]=VALUE";
And it doesn't work anymore. I've no clue, why... Can you help
me?
Because it does not see VALUE, you need to use delegate
On Friday, 10 February 2017 at 09:03:16 UTC, berni wrote:
Now I tried this with a named instead of a magic constant e.g.
immutable VALUE=-1;
arr.each!"a[]=VALUE";
And it doesn't work anymore. I've no clue, why... Can you help
me?
each is a template. As per the template documentation [1],
Dne 10.2.2017 v 10:03 berni via Digitalmars-d-learn napsal(a):
On Tuesday, 7 February 2017 at 19:06:22 UTC, berni wrote:
auto arr = uninitializedArray!(int[][])(ROWS,COLS);
arr.each!"a[]=-1";
This looks like what I was looking for. At least I think I understand
what's going on here. The othe
On Tuesday, 7 February 2017 at 19:06:22 UTC, berni wrote:
auto arr = uninitializedArray!(int[][])(ROWS,COLS);
arr.each!"a[]=-1";
This looks like what I was looking for. At least I think I
understand what's going on here. The other two suggestions are
beyond my scope yet, but I'll come back, w
auto arr = uninitializedArray!(int[][])(ROWS,COLS);
arr.each!"a[]=-1";
This looks like what I was looking for. At least I think I
understand what's going on here. The other two suggestions are
beyond my scope yet, but I'll come back, when I improved on my D
skills. Thanks for your replies.
On Sunday, 5 February 2017 at 20:33:06 UTC, berni wrote:
With X not known at compile time:
auto arr = new int[][](X,X);
for (int i=0;i
Is there anything better for this? I mean, the program will
fill the array with zeroes, just to overwrite all of them with
-1. That's wasted execution time a
On 02/05/2017 12:33 PM, berni wrote:
With X not known at compile time:
auto arr = new int[][](X,X);
for (int i=0;i
Is there anything better for this? I mean, the program will fill the
array with zeroes, just to overwrite all of them with -1. That's wasted
execution time and doesn't feel D-ish
One another way is use something like this:
import std.array, std.algorithm, std.stdio;
auto arr = uninitializedArray!(int[][])(ROWS,COLS);
arr.each!"a[]=-1";
writeln(arr);
Dne 6. 2. 2017 8:21 PM napsal uživatel "berni via Digitalmars-d-learn" <
digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com>:
> On Sunday, 5
On Sunday, 5 February 2017 at 21:14:33 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24600796/d-set-default-value-for-a-struct-member-which-is-a-multidimensional-static-arr/24754361#24754361
Dne 5.2.2017 v 21:33 berni via Digitalmars-d-learn napsal(a):
With X not known at compile
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24600796/d-set-default-value-for-a-struct-member-which-is-a-multidimensional-static-arr/24754361#24754361
Dne 5.2.2017 v 21:33 berni via Digitalmars-d-learn napsal(a):
With X not known at compile time:
auto arr = new int[][](X,X);
for (int i=0;i
Is there an
With X not known at compile time:
auto arr = new int[][](X,X);
for (int i=0;i
Is there anything better for this? I mean, the program will fill
the array with zeroes, just to overwrite all of them with -1.
That's wasted execution time and doesn't feel D-ish to me.
Thanks for the explanation
On 12/20/2016 11:59 AM, somebody wrote:
I though D should have syntax similarities with C, but recently I've
found that array indexing in D is different. Suppose we have a code:
import std.stdio;
void main ()
{
wstring[6][2] strings;
strings[2][0] = "test";
}
It fails to compile becau
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 19:59:41 UTC, somebody wrote:
I though D should have syntax similarities with C, but recently
I've found that array indexing in D is different. Suppose we
have a code:
import std.stdio;
void main ()
{
wstring[6][2] strings;
strings[2][0] = "test";
}
I
I though D should have syntax similarities with C, but recently
I've found that array indexing in D is different. Suppose we have
a code:
import std.stdio;
void main ()
{
wstring[6][2] strings;
strings[2][0] = "test";
}
It fails to compile because of error:
"./main.d(6): Error: arra
On 6/5/15 3:53 AM, Ralf the Bat wrote:
Probably a stupid question, but how do I find the length of each
dimension in a multidimensional array?
if you mean a static array, you can get each dimension using .length:
int[2][3] arr;
static assert(arr.length == 3);
static assert(arr[0].length == 2
On Friday, 5 June 2015 at 07:53:52 UTC, Ralf the Bat wrote:
Probably a stupid question, but how do I find the length of each
dimension in a multidimensional array?
I slightly modified the function deepDup, who came up Ali Çehreli
:)
http://beta.forum.dlang.org/post/mihl6m$1che$1
Probably a stupid question, but how do I find the length of each
dimension in a multidimensional array?
Thanks JKPdouble. I was hoping for a clear way to work
multidimensional arrays out.
On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 22:33:40 +0100
Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> You can do `new ubyte[256][256]`, if the destination type is a
> ubyte[256][]. The reason is that you are performing an allocation of
> the form `new T[n]`, which means allocate an array of n instances of
> type T
On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 07:40:23 -0700
"H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn"
wrote:
> File a bug.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13556
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 28/09/2014 08:48, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 04:24:19 +
Joel via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
struct Spot { bool dot; }
spots = new Spot[][](800,600);
btw, does anybody know why i can do `new ubyte[256];` but not
`new ubyte[256][256];`? hate that.
You can
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 10:48:45AM +0300, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 04:24:19 +
> Joel via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
>
> > struct Spot { bool dot; }
> > spots = new Spot[][](800,600);
> btw, does anybody know why i can do `new ubyte[256];` but not
> `new ubyt
On Sunday, 28 September 2014 at 04:24:25 UTC, Joel wrote:
I'm trying to make a multidimensional array. I feel I've tried
every thing. Is there a good guide explaining it?
struct Spot { bool dot; }
spots = new Spot[][](800,600);
assert(spots[800-1][600-1].dot, "Out of
On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 04:24:19 +
Joel via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> struct Spot { bool dot; }
> spots = new Spot[][](800,600);
btw, does anybody know why i can do `new ubyte[256];` but not
`new ubyte[256][256];`? hate that.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sunday, 28 September 2014 at 04:38:56 UTC, JKPdouble wrote:
On Sunday, 28 September 2014 at 04:24:25 UTC, Joel wrote:
I'm trying to make a multidimensional array. I feel I've tried
every thing. Is there a good guide explaining it?
struct Spot { bool dot; }
spots = new Spot[]
I'm trying to make a multidimensional array. I feel I've tried
every thing. Is there a good guide explaining it?
struct Spot { bool dot; }
spots = new Spot[][](800,600);
assert(spots[800-1][600-1].dot, "Out of bounds");
On Sunday, 28 September 2014 at 04:24:25 UTC, Joel wrote:
I'm trying to make a multidimensional array. I feel I've tried
every thing. Is there a good guide explaining it?
struct Spot { bool dot; }
spots = new Spot[][](800,600);
assert(spots[800-1][600-1].dot, "Out of bou
Meta:
auto tags = tags.flatMap!uniq.array ?
That's another solution. In Phobos a flatMap can be useful (just
as a zip overload that accepts a function to apply on the pairs,
named zipWith in haskell:
http://zvon.org/other/haskell/Outputprelude/zipWith_f.html ).
Bye,
bearophile
On Tuesday, 28 January 2014 at 15:07:26 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Gary Willoughby:
string[][] tags;
tags = tags.uniq!("a[0][1] == b[1][1]").array;
I think the right abstraction for your use case is:
auto tags = tags.flatten.uniq.array;
auto tags = tags.flatMap!uniq.array ?
Gary Willoughby:
string[][] tags;
tags = tags.uniq!("a[0][1] == b[1][1]").array;
I think the right abstraction for your use case is:
auto tags = tags.flatten.uniq.array;
Where a std.range.flatten should take a range, range of ranges,
range of range of ranges, etc, and yield the ite
On Tuesday, 28 January 2014 at 14:46:48 UTC, Gary Willoughby
wrote:
Using std.algorithm how to uniq and sort a multidimensional
array?
e.g. the uniq function takes a function as a predicate but i'm
confused how to handle the multiple dimensions.
string[][] tags;
tags = tags
Using std.algorithm how to uniq and sort a multidimensional array?
e.g. the uniq function takes a function as a predicate but i'm
confused how to handle the multiple dimensions.
string[][] tags;
tags = tags.uniq!("a[0][1] == b[1][1]").array;
The above is my attempt and it failed.
On 11/14/2013 01:31 PM, seany wrote:
> I also note you have a book http://ddili.org/ders/d.en/index.html
> (too bad that there are chapters not translated, but thank you very
much)!
You are very welcome! Just three chapters left and I must add the UDA
chapter, which has been one of the most r
Oh, this is really nice, thank you very much
I also note you have a book http://ddili.org/ders/d.en/index.html
(too bad that there are chapters not translated, but thank you
very much)!
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 at 21:24:25 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 11/14/2013 01:18 PM, seany wrote:
>
On 11/14/2013 01:18 PM, seany wrote:
> I See that in stack exchange, that it is possible to create
> multidimensional arrays like :
>
> [][] arrayname ;
That works because in C, C++, D, etc. a multi-dimensional array is
nothing but a single dimensional array where elements are arrays.
> I w
I See that in stack exchange, that it is possible to create
multidimensional arrays like :
[][] arrayname ;
and here :
http://homepages.uni-regensburg.de/~nen10015/documents/D-multidimarray.html
that such is not possible.
I would like to know more about it, and learn about
multidimensiona
On 07/05/2013 09:00 PM, Oleksiy wrote:
> Look like there is a consequence - can't perform array-wise operations
> on multidimensional arrays?
I don't want to accept that conclusion because there is no such thing as
a multidimensional array in D. :) (To be fair, they don
On Friday, 5 July 2013 at 01:31:00 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
But this doesn't compile:
char[3][5] arr = [ '.', '.', '.' ];
Error: mismatched array lengths, 15 and 3
I see that as a bug but can't be sure.
I'd file a bug report, but since [x, y, z] is primarily a dynamic
array literal, I'd
However, that is a confusing syntax because the right-hand side
is not the same type as the elements, which is dchar[3].
Perhaps D supports it for C compatibility?
Yes, I noticed:
arr = '!';
Error: cannot implicitly convert expression ('!') of type char to
dchar[3u][]
Look like there is a c
Fixing it so that the sizes for static arrays were read
left-to-right would
definitely be a usability improvement, but even if we were to
decide that the
whole "read the type outward from the variable name" was
unimportant enough to
make the change desirable, it would silently break all kinds of
On Friday, 5 July 2013 at 01:53:22 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Now I have another array where the elements are of type int[3]:
int[3][2] arr = [ 10, 20, 30 ];
Error: mismatched array lengths, 6 and 3
Ali
Combined with the fact that *this* works:
int[3][2] arr = [ 10, 20, 30, 10, 20, 30 ];
On Thursday, 4 July 2013 at 23:02:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, July 05, 2013 00:39:47 Oleksiy wrote:
Hi,
I'm new to the language and would appreciate if anybody could
clarify the following:
1. What is the rationale behind "prefix declaration" of an
array?
Using right-to-left or
On Friday, 5 July 2013 at 01:43:45 UTC, bearophile wrote:
There is a way to specify the type of a string, so this gives
errors:
void main() {
string s1 = "xx"d;
string s2 = "xx"w;
wstring s3 = "xx"d;
}
Bye,
bearophile
Also, don't forget the often forgotten explicit c suffix:
ds
Ali Çehreli:
int[3][2] arr = 10;
I would expect that to be an error because the element type is
not an int but int[3]. We know that an int[3] can be
initialized by 10 but a 10 should not be allowed to be used as
an int[3].
That was my point.
I see. That's another feature :-)
Bye,
be
On 07/04/2013 06:43 PM, bearophile wrote:
> Ali Çehreli:
>
>> However, that is a confusing syntax because the right-hand side is not
>> the same type as the elements, which is dchar[3]. Perhaps D supports
>> it for C compatibility?
>>
>> It doesn't match the following. Here, the right-hand side i
Ali Çehreli:
However, that is a confusing syntax because the right-hand side
is not the same type as the elements, which is dchar[3].
Perhaps D supports it for C compatibility?
It doesn't match the following. Here, the right-hand side is
the same as the element type:
int[2] arr2 = 42;
On 07/04/2013 03:39 PM, Oleksiy wrote:
> 1. What is the rationale behind "prefix declaration" of an array? Using
> right-to-left order to declare an array and left-to-right order to
> access elements seems confusing.
It seems to be confusing to people who are used to C and C++'s
inside-out defi
Oleksiy:
1. What is the rationale behind "prefix declaration" of an
array? Using right-to-left order to declare an array and
left-to-right order to access elements seems confusing.
I think the way Go language declares arrays and pointers is a bit
better. But for the rationale of this part of
On Friday, July 05, 2013 00:39:47 Oleksiy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to the language and would appreciate if anybody could
> clarify the following:
>
> 1. What is the rationale behind "prefix declaration" of an array?
> Using right-to-left order to declare an array and left-to-right
> order to acce
Hi,
I'm new to the language and would appreciate if anybody could
clarify the following:
1. What is the rationale behind "prefix declaration" of an array?
Using right-to-left order to declare an array and left-to-right
order to access elements seems confusing.
2. Consider this code:
dc
On 05/30/2013 04:48 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> For classes, there is no syntax for copying. The type may have annotated
> a member function that it is the duplication function or we may know by
> convention that dup() is the equivalent of array .dup.
Kenji Hara responded to another thread on the m
On 05/31/2013 01:48 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> Copying structs is trivial because they already have copy semantics:
>
> T b = a; // b is a copy of a
>
> However, that depends on correctly implemented copy semantics on T.
By "complex structs" I meant things like structs containing arrays -- a
On 05/30/2013 03:02 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> I would never have thought of that trick with the second template
parameter.
Phobos is a source of ideas. ;)
> I guess it might fall over with complex structs or classes, though. :-\
Copying structs is trivial because they already have
y to copy all the values from one multidimensional array to
another.
On 05/29/2013 10:22 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> I've been having some trouble trying to work out how to effectively
> duplicate a multidimensional array in a way that preserves type
qualifiers.
Templates preserve type qualifiers. So, as long as the return type is
the
Hello all,
I've been having some trouble trying to work out how to effectively duplicate a
multidimensional array in a way that preserves type qualifiers.
Now, obviously if we have a multidimensional array such as T[][] then calling
.dup will duplicate only the base array; so if we do some
On Sunday, 1 July 2012 at 12:21:59 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
No, that is the syntax you used for arrays of arrays.
In D, yes. In other languages I'm familiar with, such as Java,
that syntax is used for "rectangular" arrays. I've grown to like
the syntax as used in Java and I wanted to kn
On 06/30/12 22:06, Vidar Wahlberg wrote:
> Although it seems to me that you still end up with "matrix[x, y, z]" instead
> of "matrix[x][y][z]", so it will only solve one half of the problem :)
> For this particular case I'll just do the conversion from two-dimensional to
> one-dimensional array p
On Sunday, 1 July 2012 at 12:21:59 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
No, that is the syntax you used for arrays of arrays.
In D, yes. In other languages I'm familiar with, such as Java,
that syntax is used for "rectangular" arrays. I've grown to like
the syntax as used in Java and I wanted to kn
01.07.2012 16:02, Vidar Wahlberg пишет:
On Sunday, 1 July 2012 at 09:46:52 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
I'm curious why do you need such syntax? `matrix[x][y][z]` expression
means that `matrix[x]` is also a valid expression but it shouldn't.
It's not a syntax I need, it's a syntax I desire a
On Sunday, 1 July 2012 at 09:46:52 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
I'm curious why do you need such syntax? `matrix[x][y][z]`
expression means that `matrix[x]` is also a valid expression
but it shouldn't.
It's not a syntax I need, it's a syntax I desire as that's the
syntax I'm used to for mul
On Sunday, 1 July 2012 at 09:52:22 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
01.07.2012 13:46, Denis Shelomovskij пишет:
So I deliberately disallow rule
"`matrix[x]` means `matrix[x, R[]...]`"
and made `byTopDimension` property for such iteration:
`matrix.byTopDimension[x].byTopDimension[y].byTopDimension
01.07.2012 0:06, Vidar Wahlberg пишет:
On Saturday, 30 June 2012 at 19:35:33 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
Thanks for the tip, that is interesting (I'm surprised I didn't come
across this post when searching for this issue earlier). Although it
seems to me that you still end up with "matrix[x, y
On Saturday, 30 June 2012 at 20:06:58 UTC, Vidar Wahlberg wrote:
On Saturday, 30 June 2012 at 19:35:33 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij
wrote:
You could be interested in my answer on this thread:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mailman.1578.1339962782.24740.digitalmars-d-le...@puremagic.com
Thanks for th
On Saturday, 30 June 2012 at 19:35:33 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij
wrote:
You could be interested in my answer on this thread:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mailman.1578.1339962782.24740.digitalmars-d-le...@puremagic.com
Thanks for the tip, that is interesting (I'm surprised I didn't
come across th
rrect.
Creating a dynamic multidimensional array can be easily achieved with
for example "auto matrix = new int[][](4, 2);", although if I've
understood it correct this would create a "jagged" array (as explained
on page 112 in TDPL) which may cause efficiency issues due to two
i
On Saturday, June 30, 2012 21:27:15 Vidar Wahlberg wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 June 2012 at 19:06:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 30, 2012 21:01:02 Vidar Wahlberg wrote:
> >> This is a very good suggestion, I hadn't thought of this
> >> possibility, this way I can get my beloved
On Saturday, 30 June 2012 at 19:06:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Saturday, June 30, 2012 21:01:02 Vidar Wahlberg wrote:
This is a very good suggestion, I hadn't thought of this
possibility, this way I can get my beloved "matrix[x][y];"
instead of something like "matrix.get(x, y);".
It mig
On Saturday, June 30, 2012 21:01:02 Vidar Wahlberg wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 June 2012 at 18:32:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > In D, static arrays are always fixed in size, and that size
> > must be known at
> > compile time, whereas dynamic arrays are never fixed in size
> > (unless they're
>
On Saturday, 30 June 2012 at 18:32:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
In D, static arrays are always fixed in size, and that size
must be known at
compile time, whereas dynamic arrays are never fixed in size
(unless they're
immutable), and the size doesn't need to be known at compile
time. There i
correct me if my assumptions are incorrect.
>
> Creating a dynamic multidimensional array can be easily achieved
> with for example "auto matrix = new int[][](4, 2);", although if
> I've understood it correct this would create a "jagged" array (as
> explained on pag
I know multidimensional arrays has been brought up many times,
although I was not able to find a clear answer to my question. My
knowledge of what's going on behind the curtains is somewhat
lacking, please correct me if my assumptions are incorrect.
Creating a dynamic multidimensional
== Quote from spir (denis.s...@gmail.com)'s article
> How does this method perform? would you be kind enough to include it in you
> r tests, %u? Even if it's slightly slower than "(cast(int[n1*n2*n3])arr)[]
> = e;", I would use it because I find it cleaner.
But it does take up more memory (assumin
Somehow I find it surprising that this copies the whole array.
arr[] = arr2;
Static arrays are value types.
On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 01:50:56 + (UTC)
%u wrote:
> What is the fastest way to fill a static multidimensional array?
>
> Looping over all dimension's elements sounds inefficient, especially as a
> static array is essentially continuous memory.
> What is the best practice?
&
== Quote from bearophile (bearophileh...@lycos.com)'s article
> %u:
> > What is the fastest way to fill a static multidimensional array?
> If you want a safe solution, then you probably need nested loops, and a
> array[]
= x; in the inner loop (such loops may be generated wit
%u:
> What is the fastest way to fill a static multidimensional array?
If you want a safe solution, then you probably need nested loops, and a array[]
= x; in the inner loop (such loops may be generated with a string mixin too).
Otherwise if speed is more important, fixed si
What is the fastest way to fill a static multidimensional array?
Looping over all dimension's elements sounds inefficient, especially as a
static array is essentially continuous memory.
What is the best practice?
int[2][2][2] arr = 0;
arr[] = 3; //Error: cannot implicitly convert expressi
94 matches
Mail list logo
