On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 06:20:05 UTC, mikey wrote:
On Sunday, 9 October 2016 at 14:06:42 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
1. Inheritance with contracts is evaluated in a special way,
'in contracts' in the base and derived method (property) are
or-ed, so if one of them passses, the contract is
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 06:20:05 UTC, mikey wrote:
On Sunday, 9 October 2016 at 14:06:42 UTC, Antonio Corbi wrote:
1. Inheritance with contracts is evaluated in a special way,
'in contracts' in the base and derived method (property) are
or-ed, so if one of them passses, the contract is
On Sunday, October 09, 2016 14:06:42 Antonio Corbi via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> I think that the compiler assumes that its empty contract is always true.
That's exactly what it does. Having no contract is considered to be
equivalent to having an empty contract. So, because an empty contract w
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 02:33:20 UTC, lobo wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 02:18:47 UTC, TheFlyingFiddle
wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 01:22:04 UTC, lobo wrote:
Hi,
I'm coming from C++ and wondered if the pattern below has an
equivalent in D using structs. I could j
Why does FileLogger work while HTMLLogger crashes on the same
thing? I've had a look at the source code, but couldn't find
anything. It happens with vibe.d `0.7.30-beta1` and `0.7.29`
alike (haven't tested lower versions).
[Test code]
auto logLine = LogLine();
logLine.level = LogLevel.info;
/
I feel like I remember that this was added to D a while ago, but
I am not sure. Is it possible to create anonymous classes?
public interface Runnable{
void run();
}
runIt( new Runnable(){
void run(){
/* do stuff */
}
});
I want to do this without making the things any comp
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 11:56:21 UTC, tcak wrote:
I feel like I remember that this was added to D a while ago,
but I am not sure. Is it possible to create anonymous classes?
public interface Runnable{
void run();
}
runIt( new Runnable(){
void run(){
/* do stuff */
On 10/12/2016 01:56 PM, tcak wrote:
I feel like I remember that this was added to D a while ago, but I am
not sure. Is it possible to create anonymous classes?
public interface Runnable{
void run();
}
runIt( new Runnable(){
void run(){
/* do stuff */
}
});
runIt(new class
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 11:56:21 UTC, tcak wrote:
I feel like I remember that this was added to D a while ago
It has been there since the beginning, more or less, as long as I
can remember.
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 at 06:28:10 UTC, vino wrote:
On Monday, 10 October 2016 at 09:18:16 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
[...]
Hi Marc,
Thank you, I have made a small update as the Server Array is
fixed length and the Socket array would be dynamic so made the
below changes as now it is
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 11:54:14 UTC, Chris wrote:
Why does FileLogger work while HTMLLogger crashes on the same
thing? I've had a look at the source code, but couldn't find
anything. It happens with vibe.d `0.7.30-beta1` and `0.7.29`
alike (haven't tested lower versions).
[Test code
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 14:19:36 UTC, Chris wrote:
The answer is that `HTMLLogger` needs to be given the time in
the `LogLine` struct, else it fails. The time stamp is not auto
generated. I completely overlooked that.
Here's the culprit:
cf.
m_logFile.writef(`%s`,
msg.time.toISOE
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 at 20:17:19 UTC, Straivers wrote:
I have a class T with a templated function foo(string
name)(int, int, float) that will be mixed in via template, and
I want to determine if that class has mixed it in such that
foo(name = "bar"). How could I go about this? Thanks.
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 16:29:22 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 at 20:17:19 UTC, Straivers wrote:
I have a class T with a templated function foo(string
name)(int, int, float) that will be mixed in via template, and
I want to determine if that class has mixed it in su
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 16:57:50 UTC, Meta wrote:
//A template function's .stringof is of the format name>()()
//so match on the number of brackets to determine whether it's
a template function or not
enum isTemplateFunction = __traits(isTemplate, f)
&& fst
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 08:36:43 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
That's exactly what it does. Having no contract is considered
to be equivalent to having an empty contract. So, because an
empty contract will never fail, not having an in contract in
the base class (or interface) function i
Also, accepting that "in" contracts should be "or"ed, interfaces
still seem broken to me:
import std.exception;
interface Widthy {
@property inout(int) width() inout;
@property void width(int width) in { enforce(width < 0); }
}
class Test : Widthy {
private:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 20:49:40 UTC, mikey wrote:
@property void width(int width) in { enforce(width <
0); }
Arg! Stupid, I switched those around to enforces at the last
minute, the sign should have been the other way round! Anyway the
output is the same either way.
On 10/12/2016 10:40 PM, mikey wrote:
import std.exception;
class Worker {
private:
uint _wage = 10_000;
public:
@property uint wage() { return _wage; }
@property void wage(uint wage)
in {
enforce(wage >= 10_000 && wage <= 1_000_000_000
On 10/12/2016 10:49 PM, mikey wrote:
import std.exception;
interface Widthy {
@property inout(int) width() inout;
@property void width(int width) in { enforce(width < 0); }
}
class Test : Widthy {
private:
int _w;
public:
@property inout(i
On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 20:40:57 mikey via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> OK I'm somewhat struggling with this concept.
It is a bit weird. But consider
class A
{
...
auto foo(int i)
in { assert(i < 10); }
out(r) { assert(r > 20); }
body {...}
...
}
class B : A
{
I'm trying to use mixin templetes to provide generic default
implementations.
Something like this:
---
abstract class MyAbstractClass
{
void myAbstractMethod();
}
mixin template defaultImplentation(alias Method, T...)
{
override void Method()
{
}
}
class MyClass : MyAbstractClas
On Monday, 10 October 2016 at 19:16:06 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Monday, October 10, 2016 19:01:19 Yuxuan Shui via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Hi,
Why is there no opIndexDispatch for overloading a[x].func() ?
There's opIndex for overloading a[x], and then you can call a
function on the
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 22:14:32 UTC, Superstar64 wrote:
I'm trying to use mixin templetes to provide generic default
implementations.
Something like this:
---
abstract class MyAbstractClass
{
void myAbstractMethod();
}
mixin template defaultImplentation(alias Method, T...)
{
o
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 22:46:14 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
override void mixin (__traits(identifier, Method)) ... ?
Doesn't work:
test.d(8): Error: no identifier for declarator void
test.d(9): Error: found '{' when expecting ')'
test.d(10): Error: found '}' when expecting ';'
I could mak
On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 22:45:28 Yuxuan Shui via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Monday, 10 October 2016 at 19:16:06 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > On Monday, October 10, 2016 19:01:19 Yuxuan Shui via
> >
> > Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Why is there no opIndexDispatc
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 22:14:32 UTC, Superstar64 wrote:
...
Nevermind I just realized I can do this:
---
abstract class MyAbstractClass
{
void myAbstractMethod();
}
void defaultImplentation(T...)
{
}
class MyClass : MyAbstractClass
{
override void myAbstractMethod()
{
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 23:14:26 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
opIndexUnary, opIndexAssign, and opIndexOpAssign exist to make
it possible to do some basic operations on the result of
foo[bar] without having to have opIndex return by ref, but
assuming that you can return by ref, all of t
On 10/10/2016 12:01 PM, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
Hi,
Why is there no opIndexDispatch for overloading a[x].func() ?
I could not understand the question fully but would using an element
proxy work?
import std.stdio;
struct ElementProxy {
size_t index;
void opDispatch(string name, Args...)
On 10/06/2016 10:32 AM, Nordlöw wrote:
Is there a concept in D similar to Rust's `collect`:
https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/trait.Iterator.html#method.collect
That's "make" in std.container. Is that what you're looking for? As an
aside, "collect" is an awful abbreviation of "collection". -
On Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 01:15:22 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 10/06/2016 10:32 AM, Nordlöw wrote:
Is there a concept in D similar to Rust's `collect`:
https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/trait.Iterator.html#method.collect
That's "make" in std.container. Is that what you're lookin
On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 02:33 +, Meta via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 01:15:22 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
> wrote:
> > On 10/06/2016 10:32 AM, Nordlöw wrote:
> > > Is there a concept in D similar to Rust's `collect`:
> > >
> > > https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/
On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 21:15 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-
d-learn wrote:
> On 10/06/2016 10:32 AM, Nordlöw wrote:
> > Is there a concept in D similar to Rust's `collect`:
> >
> > https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/trait.Iterator.html#method.colle
> > ct
>
> That's "make" in std.cont
33 matches
Mail list logo
