On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 13:24:28 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
I don't think the problem is the lack of pattern matching. I
think the problem is that by forcing the query syntax into
lambda expression syntax, you obfuscate the syntax tree without
really gaining any value.
Where takes a delegate
On Tuesday, 17 March 2015 at 10:07:19 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 13:24:28 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
I don't think the problem is the lack of pattern matching. I
think the problem is that by forcing the query syntax into
lambda expression syntax, you obfuscate the syntax tree
On Tuesday, 17 March 2015 at 14:14:19 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
The version of where that works on .NET objects takes a
delegate - but the version used to generate SQL takes an
`Expression` -
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/vstudio/bb535040%28v=vs.110%29.aspx
Conceptually Where takes a
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:46:28 UTC, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 13:52:13 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh
wrote:
I don't have any C# experience so I can't compare those
languages much, but I've heard people say their are D / C#
similarities.
Anyway, this isn't a
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 12:18:42 UTC, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:58:54 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
Even if we can't get the lambdas as syntax tress, the fact
that we can send whatever types we want to the delegates and
overload operators and stuff means we can still
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:58:54 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
Even if we can't get the lambdas as syntax tress, the fact that
we can send whatever types we want to the delegates and
overload operators and stuff means we can still convert the
lambdas into SQL.
There are limitations on operator
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 00:56:24 UTC, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:57:33 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:46:28 UTC, Ellery Newcomer
wrote:
And C# has LINQ, which when combined with the last point is
fricken awesome.
what does LINQ offer
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 09:59:05 UTC, dnewer wrote:
yes,java is good lang,but i dont think it's better than c#,if
no oracle or google support java will less and less.
C# is a good and easy lang.
i like C# .
but,C# cant compiled to native code.
So far, I have been searching for a
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:58:54 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 00:56:24 UTC, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:57:33 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:46:28 UTC, Ellery Newcomer
wrote:
And C# has LINQ, which when combined with
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 09:59:05 UTC, dnewer wrote:
yes,java is good lang,but i dont think it's better than c#,if
no oracle or google support java will less and less.
C# is a good and easy lang.
i like C# .
Not sure what do you mean. D has classes, interfaces and foreach,
that should
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:58:54 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
Here is a very crude, very basic example:
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/94d851d7ca63.
U++ approach will probably give more succinct result. Not sure
how it fares against D philosophy: does it replace range
primitives with whole new thing?
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:57:33 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:46:28 UTC, Ellery Newcomer
wrote:
And C# has LINQ, which when combined with the last point is
fricken awesome.
what does LINQ offer that UFCS-style functional programming
does not?
LINQ basically
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:46:28 UTC, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
And C# has LINQ, which when combined with the last point is
fricken awesome.
what does LINQ offer that UFCS-style functional programming does
not?
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 00:56:24 UTC, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:57:33 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:46:28 UTC, Ellery Newcomer
wrote:
And C# has LINQ, which when combined with the last point is
fricken awesome.
what does LINQ offer
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 13:52:13 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh
wrote:
I don't have any C# experience so I can't compare those
languages much, but I've heard people say their are D / C#
similarities.
Anyway, this isn't a criticism of your comment, I was just
curious what (other than the
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 09:59:05 UTC, dnewer wrote:
yes,java is good lang,but i dont think it's better than c#,if
no oracle or google support java will less and less.
C# is a good and easy lang.
i like C# .
but,C# cant compiled to native code.
So far, I have been searching for a
dnewer:
but,C# cant compiled to native code.
Soon you will be able to compile C# natively.
Bye,
bearophile
yes,java is good lang,but i dont think it's better than c#,if no
oracle or google support java will less and less.
C# is a good and easy lang.
i like C# .
but,C# cant compiled to native code.
So far, I have been searching for a language, like c # write
efficiency, but more secure than that of
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 10:04:15 UTC, bearophile wrote:
dnewer:
but,C# cant compiled to native code.
Soon you will be able to compile C# natively.
Bye,
bearophile
i know some thing about .net native.
but its too late.i dont think microsoft will rranslate all
libiary to native.
and
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 09:59:05 UTC, dnewer wrote:
yes,java is good lang,but i dont think it's better than c#,if
no oracle or google support java will less and less.
C# is a good and easy lang.
i like C# .
but,C# cant compiled to native code.
So far, I have been searching for a
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 10:08:23 +, dnewer wrote:
and even c# can be compile natively.
i dont think C# will support to can be used to write a driver!
and you just don't need to write drivers.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
21 matches
Mail list logo
