On Friday, March 23, 2012 23:37:27 Ali Çehreli wrote:
> 'in' is the same as 'const scope'. const part is easy to understand but
> I don't know what 'scope' does. I could not understand what the spec
> means with "references in the parameter cannot be escaped (e.g. assigned
> to a global variable)"
On 03/23/2012 11:28 PM, Dan wrote:
> When would you use in / out parameters instead of ref & const keywords?
I am just about finished translating a chapter exactly on that topic.
I've just realized that I have some questions myself. :)
'out' is the equivalent of a reference in C++, with additi
On Saturday, March 24, 2012 07:28:08 Dan wrote:
> When would you use in / out parameters instead of ref & const
> keywords?
out sets the variable to its init value, so you don't run into issues with
the behavior of the function changing based on the value of the variable
that you passed in. out
When would you use in / out parameters instead of ref & const
keywords?
Thanks.
On Saturday, 24 March 2012 at 01:07:56 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Friday, March 23, 2012 23:48:51 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Does someone have a map implementation that maintains the
insertion
order of the keys?
E.g.:
string[string] map;
map["foo"] = "x";
map["bar"] = "y";
When iterating ov
On 3/24/12, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> Correction, it's:
> template isValue(T)
> {
> enum bool isValue = is(typeof( { Value v; T t; v = t; } ))
> || is(typeof( { BaseElement!Value v; T t; v = t; } ))
> || is(BaseElement!Value == T);
> }
Last check not needed, so:
> template isValue(T)
>
On 3/24/12, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> static if (isArray!Value)
> {
> template isValue(T)
> {
>enum bool isValue = is(typeof( { Value v; T t; v = t; } )) ||
> is(BaseElement!Value == T);
> }
> }
Correction, it's:
template isValue(T)
{
enum bool isValue = is(typeof( { Value
On 3/24/12, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 3/23/12, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> Does someone have a map implementation that maintains the insertion
>> order of the keys?
>
> Here's a sloppy implementation:
I forgot to make opIndex ref, but also the isValue check fails on
structs with alias this, it's
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 06:33:54PM -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 06:07:42PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Friday, March 23, 2012 23:48:51 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> > > Does someone have a map implementation that maintains the insertion
> > > order of the keys?
> > >
> >
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 06:07:42PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Friday, March 23, 2012 23:48:51 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> > Does someone have a map implementation that maintains the insertion
> > order of the keys?
> >
> > E.g.:
> >
> > string[string] map;
> > map["foo"] = "x";
> > map["bar
On 3/24/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I can't think of any data structure that does that off the top of my head
Java has it and they call it a LinkedHashMap:
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.4.2/docs/api/java/util/LinkedHashMap.html
> That _does_ require having two data structures in one, and the
On 3/23/12, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> Does someone have a map implementation that maintains the insertion
> order of the keys?
Here's a sloppy implementation:
module test;
import std.stdio;
import std.traits;
template KeyType(V : V[K], K)
if (isAssociativeArray!(V[K]))
{
alias K KeyType
On Friday, March 23, 2012 23:48:51 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> Does someone have a map implementation that maintains the insertion
> order of the keys?
>
> E.g.:
>
> string[string] map;
> map["foo"] = "x";
> map["bar"] = "y";
>
> When iterating over map keys I want to visit "foo" first, then "bar",
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 3:43 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> You can register on GC if you wrap the resources in a class. Then the
> class object's destructor would call the clean up code. The problem is, it
> is undeterministic when the destructor will be called, or will it be called
> at all!
>
> Or y
On 03/23/2012 11:58 PM, David wrote:
Am 23.03.2012 23:52, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
Code:
struct S {
int f(K)(K x) {
return 1;
}
void func(K)(inout(K) x) {
auto h = f(x);
}
}
void main() {
S s;
s.func("abc"); // This is line 44
}
This refuses to compile:
test2.d(44): Error: template test2.S.func(K)
Am 23.03.2012 23:52, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
Code:
struct S {
int f(K)(K x) {
return 1;
}
void func(K)(inout(K) x) {
auto h = f(x);
}
}
void main() {
On 03/23/2012 11:52 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Code:
struct S {
int f(K)(K x) {
return 1;
}
void func(K)(inout(K) x) {
auto h = f(x);
}
}
void main() {
Code:
struct S {
int f(K)(K x) {
return 1;
}
void func(K)(inout(K) x) {
auto h = f(x);
}
}
void main() {
S s;
s.func("abc"); // Th
Does someone have a map implementation that maintains the insertion
order of the keys?
E.g.:
string[string] map;
map["foo"] = "x";
map["bar"] = "y";
When iterating over map keys I want to visit "foo" first, then "bar", and so on.
On 3/23/12, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
> It works for me
Yes but check the isA template. It seems there's something causing a
nested variadic template to fail. This won't work in a template
constraint (it returns false):
template isA(alias Foo)
{
template isA(T)
{
enum bool isA = __trai
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 21:27, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
> That can't work. For a Foo!int your code will expand like so:
> See for yourself:
? It works for me:
template isBar(T)
{
enum isBar = __traits(compiles,
{
vo
On 3/23/12, bearophile wrote:
> This is one way to do it:
> immutable(char)** p = array(map!toStringz(data)).ptr;
This is asked so frequently that I think we could consider adding it to Phobos.
On 3/23/12, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
> testFoo is a function that accepts any Foo!( ... ) for any ... The
> second line tests it on a value of type T (T.init).
That can't work. For a Foo!int your code will expand like so:
// original code
void tester(Args...)(Foo!Args args);
tester(T.init);
void
On 03/23/2012 11:23 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 03/23/2012 08:48 AM, simendsjo wrote:
> What's the best way to convert char** from string[]?
In C, char** communicates transfer of ownership.
Ok, I once again misunderstood the question. :( My question in the
comment remains.
Thank you,
Ali
On 03/23/2012 08:48 AM, simendsjo wrote:
> What's the best way to convert char** from string[]?
In C, char** communicates transfer of ownership. Is that what you are
trying to do? Are you going to pass a slice to a C function to be filled
in by that C function?
Such functions usually assign t
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:17, Ed McCardell wrote:
>>> Is there a way to write a template constraint that matches any
>>>
>>> specialization of a given type?
>>
>>
>> Nope. But there are simple workarounds:
>>
>> class Foo(bool feature1, bool feature2) { enum _isFoo = true; }
>>
>> template isFoo
On Friday, 23 March 2012 at 15:48:12 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
What's the best way to convert char** from string[]?
This is one way to do it:
import std.algorithm, std.array, std.string, core.stdc.stdio;
void main() {
auto data = ["red", "yellow", "green"];
immutable(char)** p = array(map
What's the best way to convert char** from string[]?
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:04:48 +0100, simendsjo wrote:
Forgive my programming 101 question :)
I want to call a method from a precompiled shared library:
// c header
void f(void);
// my d file
extern(C) void f();
void main() {}
$ dmd mydfile.d
libphobos2.a(deh2_33a_525.o): In function
`_D2rt4
On Friday, 23 March 2012 at 11:20:59 UTC, Trass3r wrote:
The flags you want are -O, -inline -release.
If you don't have those, then that might explain some of the
slow down
on slicing, since -release drops a ton of runtime checks.
-noboundscheck option can also speed up things.
dmd is anyw
On Friday, 23 March 2012 at 10:48:55 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
On 23.03.2012 9:57, Comrad wrote:
On Thursday, 22 March 2012 at 10:43:35 UTC, Trass3r wrote:
What is the status at the moment? What compiler and with
which
compiler flags I should use to achieve maximum performance?
In general
Forgive my programming 101 question :)
I want to call a method from a precompiled shared library:
// c header
void f(void);
// my d file
extern(C) void f();
void main() {}
$ dmd mydfile.d
libphobos2.a(deh2_33a_525.o): In function
`_D2rt4deh213__eh_finddataFPvZPS2rt4deh213DHandlerTable':
src/r
Andrej Mitrovic:
Nope. But there are simple workarounds:
Why isn't something similar to this working?
import std.traits: Unqual;
class Foo(bool feature1, bool feature2) {}
template isFoo(T) {
static if (is(Unqual!T Unused : Foo!Features, Features...)) {
enum isFoo = true;
}
The flags you want are -O, -inline -release.
If you don't have those, then that might explain some of the slow down
on slicing, since -release drops a ton of runtime checks.
-noboundscheck option can also speed up things.
On 23.03.2012 9:57, Comrad wrote:
On Thursday, 22 March 2012 at 10:43:35 UTC, Trass3r wrote:
What is the status at the moment? What compiler and with which
compiler flags I should use to achieve maximum performance?
In general gdc or ldc. Not sure how good vectorization is though, esp.
auto-ve
On 03/23/2012 04:14 AM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 3/23/12, Ed McCardell wrote:
Is there a way to write a template constraint that matches any
specialization of a given type?
Nope. But there are simple workarounds:
class Foo(bool feature1, bool feature2) { enum _isFoo = true; }
template isFo
On 3/23/12, Ed McCardell wrote:
> Is there a way to write a template constraint that matches any
> specialization of a given type?
Nope. But there are simple workarounds:
class Foo(bool feature1, bool feature2) { enum _isFoo = true; }
template isFoo(T) {
enum bool isFoo = __traits(hasMember
Is there a way to write a template constraint that matches any
specialization of a given type?
For example can the following be done without having to write out every
combination of feature1 and feature2:
class Foo(bool feature1, bool feature2) { ... }
void useFoo(T)(T foo)
if (is(T ==
38 matches
Mail list logo
