Keep in mind the phone calls for Chase Headley process again
inside of May possibly and June, and the gloom that hung around
3rd foundation Though Gleyber Torres was loft for the yr, leaving
the Yankees tuckwith the having difficulties Headley?Recall at
the time Jacoby Ellsbury was the
On 4/23/18 8:46 PM, Byron Heads wrote:
Fibers on Win32 have a memory leak for sure:
import core.thread : Fiber;
void main() {
foreach(ulong i; 0..99_999) {
auto foo = new Foo();
foo.call();
foo.call();
}
}
It sure looks like this should be fine, the GC
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 23:27:17 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
...
If you want to know more about the array runtime, I suggest
this article: https://dlang.org/articles/d-array-article.html
...
Thanks for replying and this article is what I was looking for.
On Friday, 20 April 2018 at 20:52:17 UTC, Byron Moxie wrote:
On Friday, 20 April 2018 at 20:46:20 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 4/20/18 2:58 PM, Byron Moxie wrote:
[...]
It sounds like the problems may be due to Win32 and not the
other pieces. Have you tried on a Win64 build? Even if
On 4/23/18 7:15 PM, Dnewbie wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to understand how array concatenation works internally, like
the example below:
//DMD64 D Compiler 2.072.2
import std.stdio;
void main(){
string[] arr;
arr.length = 2;
arr[0] = "Hello";
arr[1] = "World";
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 23:15:13 UTC, Dnewbie wrote:
It's related to memcpy?
By the way... It's related to realloc and memcpy?
Hi,
I'd like to understand how array concatenation works internally,
like the example below:
//DMD64 D Compiler 2.072.2
import std.stdio;
void main(){
string[] arr;
arr.length = 2;
arr[0] = "Hello";
arr[1] = "World";
writeln(arr.length);
arr = arr[0..1] ~ "New String"
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 17:46:10 UTC, Arafel wrote:
You could also argue that function overloads are just
semantically equivalent to a single function with variadic
arguments.
It is not. As there are exact known, distinct, finite numbers and
types of arguments of functions, which can
Oh goodness. I thought D was using Doxygen!
Thanks.
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 16:52:11 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 16:16:09 UTC, Arafel wrote:
```
import std.meta;
void main()
{
pragma(msg, __traits(getMember, A, "Foo1").stringof); //
Foo1(int N) if (N & 1)
pragma(msg, __traits(getAttributes, __traits(getMember, A,
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 16:16:09 UTC, Arafel wrote:
```
import std.meta;
void main()
{
pragma(msg, __traits(getMember, A, "Foo1").stringof); //
Foo1(int N) if (N & 1)
pragma(msg, __traits(getAttributes, __traits(getMember, A,
"Foo1"))[0]); // tuple("int", "odd")
alias f1a =
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 15:44:10 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
Ah, but I'm not looking to instantiate the templates, but to
learn about them - how many parameters do they take? Are their
UDAs different, so that I should warn the programmer? Must I
wrap them in different ways?
So... Do I
I think both versions are not equivalent at all. Consider [1]:
```
import std.meta;
void main()
{
pragma(msg, __traits(getMember, A, "Foo1").stringof); // Foo1(int
N) if (N & 1)
pragma(msg, __traits(getAttributes, __traits(getMember, A,
"Foo1"))[0]); // tuple("int", "odd")
alias
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 15:00:38 UTC, Alex wrote:
Ok, thats exactly the point. If you have functions
void foo() {}
void foo(int n) {}
There is no ambiguity which function will be chosen if it will
be called.
If you have templates
// form 1
template Foo(int N) if (N & 1){} // A
On 4/23/18 11:09 AM, Dgame wrote:
It's really fun playing around:
char[int.max - 1] c;
results in
Internal error: dmd/backend/cgcod.c 634
with DMD 2.079. Guess I or somebody else should report this.
Yes, this is an ICE (Internal compiler error). Those should ALWAYS be
reported.
-Steve
It's really fun playing around:
char[int.max - 1] c;
results in
Internal error: dmd/backend/cgcod.c 634
with DMD 2.079. Guess I or somebody else should report this.
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 14:22:13 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
As with all things D, the only real spec is the compiler source
code. :p :(
:p
Proving that two templates are equivalent is in general
impossible, since any amount of wasted computation could be
performed before the end result is
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 13:48:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 4/23/18 9:32 AM, Dgame wrote:
char[-1] c;
results in
Error: char[18446744073709551615LU] size 1 *
18446744073709551615 exceeds 0x7fff size limit for static
array
Should we fix that? A negative index should be IMO
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 13:32:49 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 10:57:59 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
There is no official definition. That's because some natural
rewrite rules are implied, which are very general, I assume...
How official do you want it to be? That's the only
On 4/22/18 2:00 AM, WhatMeForget wrote:
Surely a stupid mistake on my part, but why is the first array repeated?
In addition to what Neia said, you shouldn't use pointers to dynamic
arrays. Such things are really hard to allocate on the heap, since new
int[] just makes an array, not a
On 4/23/18 9:32 AM, Dgame wrote:
char[-1] c;
results in
Error: char[18446744073709551615LU] size 1 * 18446744073709551615
exceeds 0x7fff size limit for static array
Should we fix that? A negative index should be IMO detected sooner/with
a cleaner error message.
Hm.. at least it's
char[-1] c;
results in
Error: char[18446744073709551615LU] size 1 * 18446744073709551615
exceeds 0x7fff size limit for static array
Should we fix that? A negative index should be IMO detected
sooner/with a cleaner error message.
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 10:57:59 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
There is no official definition. That's because some natural
rewrite rules are implied, which are very general, I assume...
How official do you want it to be? That's the only definition
in common use by others in the context of
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 08:07:52 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 07:49:39 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
That's not the definition of lowering used elsewhere, and so
will lead to confusion and misunderstanding. I would strongly
suggest you rethink your definition of lowering.
On Monday, April 23, 2018 07:49:00 Chris Katko via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> I'm a complete doxygen newbie. But my first thought when writing
> comments is... why not use Markdown? (Which has become almost
> universal online these days.)
>
> So I google it and Moxygen comes up. Which seems
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 07:49:39 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 04:58:38 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 00:26:23 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
There is a limited set of lowerings, and they are defined in
the language, not in user code. They include operator
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 04:58:38 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Monday, 23 April 2018 at 00:26:23 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
There is a limited set of lowerings, and they are defined in
the language, not in user code. They include operator
overloading (where `a op b` is translated to
I'm a complete doxygen newbie. But my first thought when writing
comments is... why not use Markdown? (Which has become almost
universal online these days.)
So I google it and Moxygen comes up. Which seems pretty good.
28 matches
Mail list logo
