On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 00:43:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 05:14:44PM +, via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Hmmm... thinking about it, is this possible?
1. Remove the constraints to match anything.
2. Inside the template, have some construct that
On 26/07/2014 4:31 PM, Nick Treleaven wrote:
Hi,
Ddoc doesn't seem to expand a macro near top of
http://dlang.org/hash-map.html:
// The $(CODE_HIGHLIGHT KeyType) is string
Which is weird because it expands it for 'remove' on this line not far
below it:
b.remove(hello);
Maybe a bug in dmd?
Hi all,
I'm running into a little trouble trying to build SDC. The first problem was
that the makefile does not auto-detect the appropriate llvm-config, or the
libphobos2 location, but that's simply enough fixed by doing (in my case):
make LLVM_CONFIG=llvm-config-3.4
do you use gdc ?
then you have to use -lgphobos2
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 12:12:08 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
do you use gdc ?
then you have to use -lgphobos2
scratch that I wasn't looking :)
sdc itself should not use phobos at all as far as I can tell.
libsdrt should be selfcontaint.
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 12:16:05 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 12:12:08 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
do you use gdc ?
then you have to use -lgphobos2
scratch that I wasn't looking :)
sdc itself should not use phobos at all as far as I can tell.
libsdrt should be
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 12:22:03 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 12:16:05 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 12:12:08 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
do you use gdc ?
then you have to use -lgphobos2
scratch that I wasn't looking :)
sdc itself should not use
Hello !
I have the code bellow that I want to manually allocate to use in
runtime code, because I declared the payload buf[1] the
compiler complains about index out of bounds then I managed to do
this *(tmp.buf + tmp.used++) = c; instead of
tmp.buf[tmp.used++] = c; as is done usually i C
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 08:40:42 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 00:43:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 05:14:44PM +, via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Hmmm... thinking about it, is this possible?
1. Remove the constraints to
I would do it something like this:
struct test {
size_t size;
@property char[] buf() {
return (_buf.ptr)[0 .. size];
}
private char[0] _buf;
}
The buf property returns a slice that uses the size member to
give you bounds checking, but uses the
On 27/07/14 14:22, Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
your LD_PATH seems to not have the lib in it
From the Makefile, I'd understood that LD_PATH was meant to point to the
_directory_ where the libraries are contained, not the actual library itself ...
? After all, it's just mapped
On 27/07/14 14:16, Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
sdc itself should not use phobos at all as far as I can tell.
libsdrt should be selfcontaint.
Yes, it's obviously being used to build the compiler, and supplying the flag
directly is clearly only necessary in this case for the gcc
Is shared Phobos library in /opt/dmd known do ldconfig? Can you
build a sample hello world program with -defaultlib=libphobos.so ?
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 12:49:01 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
I would do it something like this:
struct test {
size_t size;
@property char[] buf() {
return (_buf.ptr)[0 .. size];
}
private char[0] _buf;
}
The buf property returns a slice that
On 27/07/14 15:10, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Is shared Phobos library in /opt/dmd known do ldconfig?
No, but isn't that what the -L flag should be passing to gcc?
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 14:08:42 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On 27/07/14 15:10, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Is shared Phobos library in /opt/dmd known do ldconfig?
No, but isn't that what the -L flag should be passing to gcc?
if gcc knows where
On 27/07/14 16:20, Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
if gcc knows where the lib is it can compile agianst it.
But the library beeing _shared_ will not be linked with the executable but the
library will be loaded form the path's supplied as LD_PATH or in ldconfig.
The -L flag does not
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 14:44:29 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Adding a dlang.conf file in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ which adds the
/opt/dmd/lib64 path solves things.
One of many reasons why you don't usually want to circumvent
package management system ;)
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 15:00:26 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 14:44:29 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Adding a dlang.conf file in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ which adds the
/opt/dmd/lib64 path solves things.
One of many reasons why you don't usually
Hello again !
Anyone knows how to compile with gdc for different versions I
could not find how gdc implements it if it does ?
The proposed usage of @property char[] buf() although seems to
work when compiled with dmd, segfaults when compiled with gdc:
Code to test
import std.stdio;
On Saturday, 26 July 2014 at 15:24:01 UTC, Sean Campbell wrote:
is there any way to detect if a file is a binary executable
that is cross platform or a way to detect whether pipeprocss
failed to execute a file if it wasn't executable.
pipeProcess will throw a ProcessException if it can't
On 27/07/2014 09:44, Alix Pexton wrote:
On 26/07/2014 4:31 PM, Nick Treleaven wrote:
Hi,
Ddoc doesn't seem to expand a macro near top of
http://dlang.org/hash-map.html:
// The $(CODE_HIGHLIGHT KeyType) is string
Which is weird because it expands it for 'remove' on this line not far
below it:
Hello !
Based on a question about manually allocated structures with
payload I found that a solution proposed seems to work when
compiled with dmd but segfaults when compiled with gdc.
So my question is: Is this a bug on dmd, gdc or a bad idiom ?
code to see the problem
import
Just for clarification, I wanted 'myrange.at(i)' to be the same as
`myrange.dropExactly(i).front`
(so I don't assume it's a random access range).
myrange.dropExactly(i).front makes it much more obvious what you're
doing and that it's inefficient. It might be necessary in some cases, but
we don't
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 07:42:17PM -0700, Timothee Cour via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
Just for clarification, I wanted 'myrange.at(i)' to be the same as
`myrange.dropExactly(i).front`
(so I don't assume it's a random access range).
myrange.dropExactly(i).front makes it much more obvious
25 matches
Mail list logo