On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:54:35 UTC, Seb wrote:
FYI: and for the lazy ones, there will hopefully be
std.experimental.scripting soon:
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5916
Shouldn't something like this be handled by better tooling (i.e.
IDEs)? In Java you have to import every sin
On 2/10/18 4:41 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/10/2018 7:14 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
RC is a form of GC.
Pedantically, yes. But common usage regards the two as disjoint, and
it's inconvenient to treat RC as a subset of GC when discussing
tradeoffs between the two. Nobody bothers with s/GC/
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 18:40:43 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 2/10/18 10:14 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 21:24:14 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
Of course, the issue can get more complex. GC uses 3x the
memory of RC,
I’ve seen figures of about x2 but t
On 2/10/2018 7:14 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
RC is a form of GC.
Pedantically, yes. But common usage regards the two as disjoint, and it's
inconvenient to treat RC as a subset of GC when discussing tradeoffs between the
two. Nobody bothers with s/GC/GC excluding RC/.
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 19:22:51 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Saturday, February 10, 2018 14:06:09 Timon Gehr via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 08.02.2018 16:55, JN wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:54:19 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
> wrote:
>> Garbage collection has proved to be a smash
On Saturday, February 10, 2018 14:06:09 Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 08.02.2018 16:55, JN wrote:
> > On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:54:19 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> >> Garbage collection has proved to be a smashing success in the
> >> industry, providing productivity and memory-saf
On 2/10/18 10:14 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 21:24:14 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Of course, the issue can get more complex. GC uses 3x the memory of RC,
I’ve seen figures of about x2 but that was in an old paper on Boehm GC.
This is the classic reference:
http
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 21:24:14 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/9/2018 1:14 AM, meppl wrote:
let's say python is supposed to offer slow execution. So,
python doesn't prove reference counting is fast (even if it is
possible in theory). D on the other hand provides binaries who
are expecte
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 21:24:14 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Of course, the issue can get more complex. GC uses 3x the
memory of RC, and so you can get extra slowdowns from swapping
and cache misses.
Is the total memory consumption tripled, or only the extra memory
used for tracking alloc
On 08.02.2018 16:55, JN wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:54:19 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
Garbage collection has proved to be a smashing success in the
industry, providing productivity and memory-safety to programmers of
all skill levels.
Citation needed on how garbage collection has
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 19:50:50 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 19:28:40 UTC, Seb wrote:
Yes, that's the intended goal.
However, to convince everyone involved and to be able to
experiment with this in the wild for a bit, we went with
std.experimental first.
If drawba
On 2/9/2018 6:11 AM, Atila Neves wrote:
It's easy enough to create std package like this:
module std;
public import std.algorithm;
//...
Yes, but I suspect that'll be a large negative for compile speed for smallish
programs.
On 2/9/2018 1:14 AM, meppl wrote:
let's say python is supposed to offer slow execution. So, python doesn't prove
reference counting is fast (even if it is possible in theory). D on the other
hand provides binaries who are expected to execute fast.
I believe it has been shown (sorry, no referen
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 02:09:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Thursday, February 08, 2018 23:57:45 Rubn via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 18:06:38 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
> I.e. it isn't an issue of us D guys being dumb about the GC.
So you could say it's a de
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 19:28:40 UTC, Seb wrote:
Yes, that's the intended goal.
However, to convince everyone involved and to be able to
experiment with this in the wild for a bit, we went with
std.experimental first.
If drawbacks get discovered, it's a lot easier to retreat.
Cool.
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 17:41:45 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:54:35 UTC, Seb wrote:
FYI: and for the lazy ones, there will hopefully be
std.experimental.scripting soon:
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5916
Why not make this a package.d file for std?
Yes
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:54:35 UTC, Seb wrote:
FYI: and for the lazy ones, there will hopefully be
std.experimental.scripting soon:
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5916
Why not make this a package.d file for std?
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 14:11:37 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 01:55:10 UTC, Benny wrote:
[...]
It's easy enough to create std package like this:
module std;
public import std.algorithm;
//...
However, I'm a _huge_ fan of local imports and only importing
what's
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 18:06:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/8/2018 9:03 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
If D had a decent garbage collector it might be a more
convincing argument.
'Decent' GC systems rely on the compiler emitting "write gates"
around every assignment to a pointer. These are
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 01:55:10 UTC, Benny wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 00:08:56 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 23:50:29 UTC, Ali wrote:
- import ... really, we are 2018 and people are still wasting
our time to have standard libraries as imports. Its ev
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:55:09 UTC, JN wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:54:19 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
Garbage collection has proved to be a smashing success in the
industry, providing productivity and memory-safety to
programmers of all skill levels.
Citation needed on ho
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 01:55:10 UTC, Benny wrote:
Plenty of "general purpose" programming languages. The issue
being that very few offer classes, no GC, easy syntax, good
tooling and editor support, ...
[...]
D, D never changes ( fallout reference ).
Hi Benny,
I have read both of yo
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 21:01:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
That really is an informative article, thanks. The only issue
with it is that it doesn't cover the newer C++ ref counting
model, which has proved popular.
Here is another very informative article, outling the 'tradeoff'
betw
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 01:36:02 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 01:31:41 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 17:10:00 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
What are D's limitations on do-it-yourself reference counting?
* Types that are built into the lan
- import ... really, we are 2018 and people are still wasting
our time to have standard libraries as imports. Its even more
fun when you split, only to need import the array library.
Please explain what do you mean by it?
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 23:27:25 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:55:09 UTC, JN wrote:
Citation needed on how garbage collection has been a smashing
success based on its merits rather than the merits of the
languages that use garbage collection.
Who cares?
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 01:55:10 UTC, Benny wrote:
People talk about the need for a clear design focus, leadership
and ... things go on as before. That is D in a nutshell. People
doing what they want, whenever and things stay the same. New
features ( that is always fun ), a few people d
On Thu, 08 Feb 2018 17:08:41 +, bachmeier wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:55:09 UTC, JN wrote:
>
>> Python was also a smashing success, but it doesn't use a garbage
>> collector in it's default implementation (CPython).
>
> I'm pretty sure CPython uses a mark-and-sweep GC togethe
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:51:38 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:43:01 UTC, ixid wrote:
That's been said over and over and the message has not gotten
through.
It is almost never said! We always play by their terms and
implicitly concede by saying "but we c
On Thursday, February 08, 2018 23:57:45 Rubn via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 18:06:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> > I.e. it isn't an issue of us D guys being dumb about the GC.
>
> So you could say it's a design flaw of D, attempting to use a GC
> where it isn't suited?
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 00:08:56 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 23:50:29 UTC, Ali wrote:
But D, unlike many other languages, promotes itself as
primarily a system programming language
I think that's a mistake too. I'd rebrand it as a "general
purpose" programm
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 01:31:41 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 17:10:00 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
What are D's limitations on do-it-yourself reference counting?
* Types that are built into the language like dynamic arrays,
associative arrays, and exceptions won
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 17:10:00 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
What are D's limitations on do-it-yourself reference counting?
* Types that are built into the language like dynamic arrays,
associative arrays, and exceptions won't benefit from DIY
reference counting.
* Much of Phobos probabl
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 23:50:29 UTC, Ali wrote:
But D, unlike many other languages, promotes itself as
primarily a system programming language
I think that's a mistake too. I'd rebrand it as a "general
purpose" programming language. One language you can use
everywhere. It worked for
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 17:32:53 UTC, ixid wrote:
Do you really think sticking with the current course on GC
would gain more users than very slightly changing tack and
making it something you add to a simpler base? I think the
second of those will gain more users.
No, the current cour
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 18:06:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I.e. it isn't an issue of us D guys being dumb about the GC.
So you could say it's a design flaw of D, attempting to use a GC
where it isn't suited?
If going malloc didnt lose you a bunch of features and bring a
bunch of oth
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 23:27:25 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:55:09 UTC, JN wrote:
Citation needed on how garbage collection has been a smashing
success based on its merits rather than the merits of the
languages that use garbage collection.
Who cares?
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 16:40:46 UTC, John Gabriele wrote:
Regarding what you said about the implementation of the GC
following in the footsteps of industry giants, what
specifically about D's GC impl is patterned after other
industry giant's GC's?
The simple fact that it is a GC. The
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:55:09 UTC, JN wrote:
Citation needed on how garbage collection has been a smashing
success based on its merits rather than the merits of the
languages that use garbage collection.
Who cares? Even if the success isn't because of GC per se, the
ubiquity of it
On 2/8/2018 11:51 AM, bachmeier wrote:
The developers working on .NET had the opportunity to learn from Java, yet they
went with GC.[0] Anyone that says one approach is objectively better than the
other is clearly not familiar with all the arguments - or more likely, believes
their problem is t
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 18:06:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/8/2018 9:03 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
If D had a decent garbage collector it might be a more
convincing argument.
'Decent' GC systems rely on the compiler emitting "write gates"
around every assignment to a pointer. These are
On Thursday, February 08, 2018 11:28:52 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 12:17:06PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 08, 2018 14:54:19 Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d
>
> > wrote:
> [...]
>
> > > Garbage collection has proved t
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 19:51:05 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
The developers working on .NET had the opportunity to learn
from Java, yet they went with GC.[0] Anyone that says one
approach is objectively better than the other is clearly not
familiar with all the arguments - or more likely, bel
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 19:34:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/8/2018 10:11 AM, JN wrote:
I agree, however these languages would probably have been
successful even without GC, using e.g. some form of automatic
reference counting.
If reference counting would work with Java, and was be
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 12:17:06PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Thursday, February 08, 2018 14:54:19 Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d
> wrote:
[...]
> > Garbage collection has proved to be a smashing success in the
> > industry, providing productivity and memory-safety to
On 2/8/2018 10:11 AM, JN wrote:
I agree, however these languages would probably have been successful even
without GC, using e.g. some form of automatic reference counting.
If reference counting would work with Java, and was better, wouldn't the Java
developers have done it decades ago?
On Thursday, February 08, 2018 14:54:19 Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 11:06:15 UTC, ixid wrote:
> > It feels like D has not overcome at least two major issues in
> > the public mind, the built-in GC
>
> D is a pragmatic language aimed toward writing fast
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 18:06:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
[snip]
More precise GC exacts heavy runtime penalties, too, which is
why attempts to add them to D have had mixed results.
See, there's your problem right there. Now if you replace the
current GC with the slowest possible
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 18:08:59 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/8/2018 7:55 AM, JN wrote:
Citation needed on how garbage collection has been a smashing
success based on its merits rather than the merits of the
languages that use garbage collection.
You can't separate the two. The Java
On 2/8/2018 7:55 AM, JN wrote:
Citation needed on how garbage collection has been a smashing success based on
its merits rather than the merits of the languages that use garbage collection.
You can't separate the two. The Java and Go language semantics are designed
around the GC.
On 2/8/2018 9:03 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
If D had a decent garbage collector it might be a more convincing argument.
'Decent' GC systems rely on the compiler emitting "write gates" around every
assignment to a pointer. These are justified in languages like Java and Go for
which everything is GC
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 11:40:44 UTC, Seb wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 11:06:15 UTC, ixid wrote:
[...]
https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/2057
[...]
One of Andrei's student is working on this.
I think she has been focusing on templated ==, <= and AAs so
far and is no
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:51:38 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:43:01 UTC, ixid wrote:
That's been said over and over and the message has not gotten
through.
It is almost never said! We always play by their terms and
implicitly concede by saying "but we c
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:55:09 UTC, JN wrote:
Python was also a smashing success, but it doesn't use a
garbage collector in it's default implementation (CPython).
I'm pretty sure CPython uses a mark-and-sweep GC together with
reference counting.
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 17:03:58 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:56:31 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
ooh better last sentence
D's GC implementation follows in the footsteps of industry
giants without compromising experts' ability to realize
maximum potential fro
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:56:31 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
ooh better last sentence
D's GC implementation follows in the footsteps of industry
giants without compromising experts' ability to realize maximum
potential from the machine.
If D had a decent garbage collector it might be
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:54:19 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 11:06:15 UTC, ixid wrote:
It feels like D has not overcome at least two major issues in
the public mind, the built-in GC
D is a pragmatic language aimed toward writing fast code, fast.
Garbage c
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:51:38 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:43:01 UTC, ixid wrote:
That's been said over and over and the message has not gotten
through.
It is almost never said! We always play by their terms and
implicitly concede by saying "but we c
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:54:19 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
Garbage collection has proved to be a smashing success in the
industry, providing productivity and memory-safety to
programmers of all skill levels.
Citation needed on how garbage collection has been a smashing
success based o
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:43:01 UTC, ixid wrote:
That's been said over and over and the message has not gotten
through.
It is almost never said! We always play by their terms and
implicitly concede by saying "but we can avoid it" or "look
-betterC".
Reddit invades our space, and we
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:56:31 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
ooh better last sentence
D's GC implementation follows in the footsteps of industry
giants without compromising experts' ability to realize maximum
potential from the machine.
That's been said over and over and the message h
ooh better last sentence
D's GC implementation follows in the footsteps of industry giants
without compromising experts' ability to realize maximum
potential from the machine.
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 11:06:15 UTC, ixid wrote:
It feels like D has not overcome at least two major issues in
the public mind, the built-in GC
D is a pragmatic language aimed toward writing fast code, fast.
Garbage collection has proved to be a smashing success in the
industry, prov
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 11:06:15 UTC, ixid wrote:
How difficult would it be for D at this point to move towards a
pay for what you use system that out of the box is betterC and
requires the garbage collector to be explicitly imported?
I'm not sure if this is what you're looking for, bu
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 11:06:15 UTC, ixid wrote:
How difficult would it be for D at this point to move towards a
pay for what you use system that out of the box is betterC and
requires the garbage collector to be explicitly imported?
https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/2057
It fee
65 matches
Mail list logo
