On 2011-05-16 21:31, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> Yeah it's low priority, but nice to have.
>
> Note that there's a similar issue with tuples. However since tuples
> are a library type and not first-class citizens (when it comes to
> return types that is), the compiler probably won't be able to figure
Yeah it's low priority, but nice to have.
Note that there's a similar issue with tuples. However since tuples
are a library type and not first-class citizens (when it comes to
return types that is), the compiler probably won't be able to figure
out a common type.
What I mean is this:
auto foo()
On 2011-05-16 20:40, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> auto foo()
> {
> if (1)
> {
> return [0, 0];
> }
> else
> {
> size_t one;
> size_t two;
>
> return [one, two];
> }
> }
>
> void main(){ }
>
> Error: mismatched function return type inference of
auto foo()
{
if (1)
{
return [0, 0];
}
else
{
size_t one;
size_t two;
return [one, two];
}
}
void main(){ }
Error: mismatched function return type inference of
uint[] and int[]
Surely the compiler can figure out a common type for t
Thanks for the formatting tips. Copy and pasting kind of messed up
the formatting, not that it was good to start with. I am still
developing a coding style.
== Quote from bearophile (bearophileh...@lycos.com)'s article
> dmerrio:
> > import main; //class definition of rng
> > import std.math; //tr
Thank you for the reply. Potential, but there still seems to be
alot of repetitive code.
dmerrio:
> import main; //class definition of rng
> import std.math; //trig functions
> import std.conv; //to!double
> import std.string; //toupper
>
> double transFunc(alias transedentalFunc)(rng aRng){
> try{return(transedentalFunc(aRng.getCellValue().coerce!
> (double)));} //cellValue st
On 05/16/2011 01:08 PM, dmerrio wrote:
I am parsing some formulas from a spreadsheet file. To duplicate
the behavior of the spreadsheet functions, I am having to create a
lot of boiler plate code that maps from the spreadsheet functions
to the built-in functions. Mixin would seem to allow me to
a
This happens on Win7 32 bit using dmd 2.053 and Qt 2010.05
import std.stdio;
import qt.gui.QMessageBox;
import qt.gui.QApplication;
int main(string[] args) {
auto app = new QApplication(args);
// comment out the messagebox, and it doesn't crash
QMessageBox.critical(null, tr("This is
On Mon, 16 May 2011 16:34:20 -0400, nrgyzer wrote:
== Auszug aus Steven Schveighoffer (schvei...@yahoo.com)'s Artikel
If D supported runtime reflection (and it does to a very very small
degree), then you could use it to ensure the correct constructor is
available.
-Steve
It's semicode, so
Nick Sabalausky:
> Then again, if the network is all designed as set up well, and
> not congested, and the DB does have the data in RAM cache, then I'd
> imagine the lack of needing to do physical disk I/O could still
> make it faster.
Yeah, I work with two setups like that, but in my cases the db
== Auszug aus Steven Schveighoffer (schvei...@yahoo.com)'s Artikel
> On Mon, 16 May 2011 16:12:05 -0400, nrgyzer
wrote:
> > == Auszug aus Steven Schveighoffer (schvei...@yahoo.com)'s Artikel
> >> On Mon, 16 May 2011 15:32:43 -0400, useo
> > wrote:
> >> > Hey guys,
> >> >
> >> > is there any chanc
"Adam D. Ruppe" wrote in message
news:iqrj55$24d8$1...@digitalmars.com...
> Alexander wrote:
>
> Database access vs a session cache is another thing you'd profile.
> I suspect you'd be surprised - database engine authors spend a lot
> of time making sure their engine does fast reads, and frequent
On Mon, 16 May 2011 16:12:05 -0400, nrgyzer wrote:
== Auszug aus Steven Schveighoffer (schvei...@yahoo.com)'s Artikel
On Mon, 16 May 2011 15:32:43 -0400, useo
wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> is there any chance to create an abstract constructor like:
>
> abstract class ABC {
>
>abstract this();
== Auszug aus Steven Schveighoffer (schvei...@yahoo.com)'s Artikel
> On Mon, 16 May 2011 15:32:43 -0400, useo
wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > is there any chance to create an abstract constructor like:
> >
> > abstract class ABC {
> >
> >abstract this();
> >
> > }
> >
> > DMD always says "...this
On 14.05.2011 20:07, simendsjo wrote:
I used the instructions here:
http://dsource.org/projects/qtd/wiki/BuildWindows
Could qtd depend on another qt sdk than the one linked from this
page?
A messagebox poppes up saying:
"generator.exe - The procedure entry point
_Z17qt_message_output9QtMsgTypeP
foreach runs at runtime, while mixin is expanded at compile time.
Not the whole truth though.
foreach over tuples gets unrolled at compile time so you can do stuff like:
// +=, -=, ...
Vector opOpAssign(string op, U)(U s)
{
foreach (i, _; tuple)
mixin("tuple[i] " ~ op ~
On 16/05/2011 09:54, Alexander wrote:
On 16.05.2011 01:25, Robert Clipsham wrote:
It most definitely does not work perfectly. You highlight those that are not
familiar with web development? They're the ones that use it.
Visual Studio defaults to not using it now, there's a reason for that. I
On Mon, 16 May 2011 15:32:43 -0400, useo wrote:
Hey guys,
is there any chance to create an abstract constructor like:
abstract class ABC {
abstract this();
}
DMD always says "...this non-virtual functions cannot be abstract" -
when I use an interface like:
interface ABC {
this();
changing the relevent code, changes the error, but it still does
not compile...
immutable funcs = ["tan"];
void createFuncs(){
foreach(func; funcs){
mixin("double " ~ toupper(func) ~ "(double aReal)
{return(" ~ func ~ "(aReal));}");
}
}
new error...
Error 1
On 2011-05-16 12:32, useo wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> is there any chance to create an abstract constructor like:
>
> abstract class ABC {
>
>abstract this();
>
> }
>
> DMD always says "...this non-virtual functions cannot be abstract" -
> when I use an interface like:
>
> interface ABC {
>
>
> Hey guys,
>
> is there any chance to create an abstract constructor like:
>
> abstract class ABC {
>
>abstract this();
>
> }
>
> DMD always says "...this non-virtual functions cannot be abstract" -
> when I use an interface like:
>
> interface ABC {
>
>this();
>
> }
>
> I get a similar er
> I am parsing some formulas from a spreadsheet file. To duplicate
> the behavior of the spreadsheet functions, I am having to create a
> lot of boiler plate code that maps from the spreadsheet functions
> to the built-in functions. Mixin would seem to allow me to
> automate the boiler-plate creati
Hey guys,
is there any chance to create an abstract constructor like:
abstract class ABC {
abstract this();
}
DMD always says "...this non-virtual functions cannot be abstract" -
when I use an interface like:
interface ABC {
this();
}
I get a similar error: "...constructors, destruct
string[] funcs = ["tan"];
calling mixin a compile time has the following error...
Error 1 Error: variable func cannot be read at compile time
C:\D\SVNProjects\trunk\xcellD\xcell1\trig.d 22
That's because funcs is mutable.
Try to make it immutable or enum.
I am parsing some formulas from a spreadsheet file. To duplicate
the behavior of the spreadsheet functions, I am having to create a
lot of boiler plate code that maps from the spreadsheet functions
to the built-in functions. Mixin would seem to allow me to
automate the boiler-plate creation, but i
Alexander wrote:
> I don't know how many visitors your websites have, but if you have
> several visits per second - you will feel it.
Two notes here: #1 several visits per second means over 5 million
views a month. That's actually very rare.
The way I do optimizations is I write it just however c
On 2011-05-15 23:13, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Like I described in another post, I've *worked with* people who did web
development professionally who still undeniably had nearly zero real
competence. So you can't tell me just because they do it professionally
indicates they actually have a clue what
On 15.05.2011 20:54, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> FYI, PHP uses files on the hard drive for sessions by default...
> optionally, it can use a database too.
Not really. There are different options to keep the session data, though - so
some of them may resort to store something in the disk. Both cases
On 2011-05-15 21:19, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
But, in a lot of cases, you have to change the model to change
the data you're showing anyway... the view only has what's available
to it.
Depending on what needs to be changed this is the job of the controller,
to get the necessary data, for a specifi
On Wed, 11 May 2011 19:43:03 -0400, Stewart Gordon
wrote:
On 06/05/2011 13:02, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
D has this horrible notion that any interface can be for a COM object,
even though COM
interfaces can only inherit from IUnknown (known statically).
Therefore, interfaces that
don't
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> I think you really should give it a try. This is a good place to start:
Cool, thanks!
> Don't know why but I think this is verbose and it's more difficult
> to visualize how the HTML will look like.
That's also a bizarre example... 9/10 times, my code looks more like:
au
> Instead you move the view layer into the model or controller
> layer. How's that any different?
Is that really what's happening? Any template has variables made
available to it from the model. I'm just making them available
at a higher level (pre-wrapped in semantic tags and grouped
together).
On 2011-05-15 20:11, Alexander wrote:
On 15.05.2011 19:36, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
I think you'll feel differently once you see people abuse that option. It
becomes hard to follow what's going on.
Sure I will feel differently, that's why I've said "if used correctly" - and
I do use it corre
On 2011-05-15 19:15, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
But that way you would need to declare different types of Options
structs all over the place?
Sometimes, but most functions are fine with regular argument lists,
to me, using enums for options where appropriate.
In Rails basical
On 16.05.2011 12:23, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> The vast majority of web developers *are* very, very, poor coders. Being
> correct and being in the majority have absolutely *nothing* to do with each
> other.
Sorry, but I still don't get it - who is defining what is correct and what is
not? And
"Alexander" wrote in message
news:iqqq9p$ka6$1...@digitalmars.com...
> On 16.05.2011 01:21, Robert Clipsham wrote:
>
>> I can't be bothered collecting lots of references, but having done web
>> development both professionally (not as much as Nick) and
>> non-professionally, I can tell you that
On 16.05.2011 01:21, Robert Clipsham wrote:
> I can't be bothered collecting lots of references, but having done web
> development both professionally (not as much as Nick) and non-professionally,
> I can tell you that it *is* widely accepted as bad practice.
Accepted as bad practice by whom?
On 2011-05-15 17:46, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I don't see anything wrong with the view layer containing simple
logic, like this (written in HAML):
I don't think it's bad - I just think it isn't as good as we can get.
Correct me if I'm wrong but you don't like to have logic
On 16.05.2011 01:25, Robert Clipsham wrote:
> It most definitely does not work perfectly. You highlight those that are not
> familiar with web development? They're the ones that use it.
>
> Visual Studio defaults to not using it now, there's a reason for that. I
> don't know about PHP IDEs.
40 matches
Mail list logo
