On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 05:10:14 UTC, Yatheendra wrote:
It feels disingenous to want to call a caching object even
"logically" const. There has to be a scaffolding-based but
hopefully generic compromise. I haven't yet tested this belief,
but I believe "physical" const is of good use wherev
On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 01:27:31 UTC, lili wrote:
A nick site, has a lot of languages, unfortunately no dlang in
there.
https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/
See https://github.com/kostya/benchmarks
On Friday, 21 June 2019 at 22:35:55 UTC, Mike Brockus wrote:
On Friday, 21 June 2019 at 17:52:43 UTC, Mike Wey wrote:
On 21-06-2019 06:08, Mike Brockus wrote:
[...]
If you are using the D unittests in your source you can
recompile the same source with `d_unittest: true`, the
appstream-gener
I'm looking into why my thing does so many memory allocations.
Profiling with kcachegrind shows _d_allocmemory being called upon
entering a certain function, lots and lots of times.
It's a function that receives concurrency messages, so it
contains nested functions that close over local variab
On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 19:26:13 UTC, Cym13 wrote:
On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 16:52:07 UTC, Anonymouse wrote:
[...]
Clearly this is a good time for you to learn about the tools D
offers to profile allocations. There is the --profile=gc DMD
argument that you can use but here there's so
On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 16:52:07 UTC, Anonymouse wrote:
I'm looking into why my thing does so many memory allocations.
Profiling with kcachegrind shows _d_allocmemory being called
upon entering a certain function, lots and lots of times.
It's a function that receives concurrency messages,
On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 16:52:07 UTC, Anonymouse wrote:
When entering the following function, does it allocate:
1. 0 times, because while there are closures defined, none is
ever called?
2. 2 times, because there are closures over two variables?
3. 20 times, because there are 20 unique cl
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 16:40:18 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
So ironically, the iron-clad semantics of D's const system
turns out to be also its own downfall.
Such things are not ironic. There is always a trade off. You get
nothing for free in this universe. Physics tells us this.
Con
On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 13:51:10 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Friday, 21 June 2019 at 22:35:55 UTC, Mike Brockus wrote:
On Friday, 21 June 2019 at 17:52:43 UTC, Mike Wey wrote:
On 21-06-2019 06:08, Mike Brockus wrote:
[...]
If you are using the D unittests in your source you can
recompil
