On 2012-10-31 23:48, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
I tried it and found getting almost there is easy... but getting it
to work in a bunch of edge cases is incredibly difficult.
I can imagine operator overloading, opDispatch and similar features
making it a lot harder.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 21:04:28 UTC, Alex Rønne
Petersen wrote:
On 11-10-2012 22:56, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Oct 11, 2012, at 6:17 AM, Lubos Pintes
lubos.pin...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Can someone point me to some source with information about
name demangling when compiling some D
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:16:25PM +0100, Dan wrote:
On Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 21:04:28 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen
wrote:
On 11-10-2012 22:56, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Oct 11, 2012, at 6:17 AM, Lubos Pintes
lubos.pin...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Can someone point me to some source with
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 15:40:23 -, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:16:25PM +0100, Dan wrote:
On Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 21:04:28 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen
wrote:
On 11-10-2012 22:56, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Oct 11, 2012, at 6:17 AM, Lubos Pintes
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 15:40:23 -, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:16:25PM +0100, Dan wrote:
On Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 21:04:28 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen
wrote:
On 11-10-2012 22:56, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Oct 11, 2012, at 6:17 AM, Lubos Pintes
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 04:25:56PM -, Regan Heath wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 15:40:23 -, H. S. Teoh
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:16:25PM +0100, Dan wrote:
On Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 21:04:28 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen
wrote:
On 11-10-2012 22:56, Sean
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:25:56 -, Regan Heath re...@netmail.co.nz
wrote:
Adding writefln to demangle.d to debug the issue shows that args[1] is
- and that getopt is throwing the exception invalid UTF-8 sequence.
I was wrong here, this line is the issue:
stderr.writeln(e.msg);
For some
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:21:29 -, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 04:25:56PM -, Regan Heath wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 15:40:23 -, H. S. Teoh
hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:16:25PM +0100, Dan wrote:
On Thursday, 11 October
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 08:40:23AM -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:16:25PM +0100, Dan wrote:
On Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 21:04:28 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen
wrote:
[...]
We even have a tool for that:
The docs say:
Convenience names that allow using e.g. yes!encryption instead
of Flag!encryption.yes and no!encryption instead of
Flag!encryption.no.
I could not get yes!encription to work. But Yes.encription
does. Are the docs out of date? Am I missing something? E.g.,
module yes_no_flag;
Hi,
Some time ago I reported on D.Anounce, that Vibe apps are not working on
my system, they failed with an exception. So I diagnosed a bit and found
the following:
There is a folder on my system
C:\Users\pintes\AppData\Local\Temp\.rdmd\source
which contains some DLLs needed for successful
On 11/01/2012 10:41 AM, Peter Summerland wrote:
The docs say:
Convenience names that allow using e.g. yes!encryption instead of
Flag!encryption.yes and no!encryption instead of
Flag!encryption.no.
The documentation is wrong.
Please either file a bug report or click the Improve this page
On Thursday, 1 November 2012 at 18:25:22 UTC, Lubos Pintes wrote:
Hi,
Some time ago I reported on D.Anounce, that Vibe apps are not
working on my system, they failed with an exception. So I
diagnosed a bit and found the following:
There is a folder on my system
For example, adding 3 strings to type tuple t:
foreach( i; 0..2 )
alias TypeTuple!( t, string ) t; // this is wrong code
and result should be:
TypeTuple!( string, string, string );
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 19:42:07 +0100, denizzzka wrote:
For example, adding 3 strings to type tuple t:
foreach( i; 0..2 )
alias TypeTuple!( t, string ) t; // this is wrong code
and result should be:
TypeTuple!( string, string, string );
Use a recursive template. Here's one that
On 2012-11-01, 19:52, Justin Whear wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 19:42:07 +0100, denizzzka wrote:
For example, adding 3 strings to type tuple t:
foreach( i; 0..2 )
alias TypeTuple!( t, string ) t; // this is wrong code
and result should be:
TypeTuple!( string, string, string );
Use a
Great! Thanks!
TDPL states
--
However, unlike in C++, clear does not dispose of the object’s
own memory and there is no delete operator. (D used to have a
delete operator, but it was deprecated.) You still can free
memory manually if you really, really know what you’re doing by
calling the function
On 01-11-2012 22:21, Dan wrote:
TDPL states
--
However, unlike in C++, clear does not dispose of the object’s
own memory and there is no delete operator. (D used to have a
delete operator, but it was deprecated.) You still can free
memory manually if you really, really know what you’re doing
auto i = SList!int(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7);
auto f = SList!float(1.1, 2.234, 3.21, 4.3, 5.001, 6.2, 7.0);
auto s = SList!string([I, Hello, World]);
auto c = SList!char('a', 'b' ,'c'); // doesn't compile, get the
following
C:\D\dmd2\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos\std\container.d(905):
Error:
On 11/01/2012 02:21 PM, Dan wrote:
TDPL states
--
However, unlike in C++, clear does not dispose of the object’s
own memory and there is no delete operator.
Additionally, TDPL predates 'clear's deprecation in December 2012. It is
called 'destroy' now.
Ali
On 11/01/2012 03:18 PM, They call me Mr. D wrote:
auto i = SList!int(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7);
auto f = SList!float(1.1, 2.234, 3.21, 4.3, 5.001, 6.2, 7.0);
auto s = SList!string([I, Hello, World]);
auto c = SList!char('a', 'b' ,'c'); // doesn't compile, get the following
On Thursday, November 01, 2012 22:21:11 Dan wrote:
struct S {
int[] a; // array is privately owned by this instance
this(this) {
a = a.dup;
}
~this() {
delete a;
}
}
Is the delete call, then per TDPL not necessary? Is it harmful or
harmless?
It's not necessary at all. delete is
23 matches
Mail list logo
