On Wednesday, 3 April 2024 at 21:57:00 UTC, Liam McGillivray
wrote:
Alright. I suppose that some of the optimization decisions I
have made so far may have resulted in less readable code for
little performance benefit. Now I'm trying to worry less about
optimization. Everything has been very
On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 09:57:00PM +, Liam McGillivray via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Friday, 29 March 2024 at 01:18:22 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > Take a look at the docs for core.memory.GC. There *is* a method
> > GC.free that you can use to manually deallocate GC-allocated memory
> >
On Saturday, 6 April 2024 at 12:05:56 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Actually, since I'm usually the one who does the FreeBSD ones
anyway, here you go:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/16359
The declarations compile, and they should match the ones in C,
since I copied them over and then
Actually, since I'm usually the one who does the FreeBSD ones anyway, here
you go:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/16359
The declarations compile, and they should match the ones in C, since I
copied them over and then tweaked them, but I haven't actually tested them.
All that being said, even
On Saturday, April 6, 2024 3:57:46 AM MDT Arjan via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> I'm using posix mqueue in a D application on Linux. Works fine.
> But on FreeBSD it fails to compile due to the version statement:
>
> [version (CRuntime_Glibc):](
>
On Saturday, 6 April 2024 at 09:21:34 UTC, rkompass wrote:
I checked:
```d
import std.stdio,
std.range,
std.algorithm;
struct N(T)
{
T last, step, first;
bool empty() => first >= last;
T front() => first;
auto popFront() => first += step;
}
void main() {
auto r1 =
On Friday, 5 April 2024 at 21:26:10 UTC, Salih Dincer wrote:
On Friday, 5 April 2024 at 21:16:42 UTC, rkompass wrote:
In the first example the int's are converted to doubles (also
common type).
But they appear as int's because writeln does not write a
trailing .0.
But it doesn't work as
On Friday, April 5, 2024 3:11:42 AM MDT Dom DiSc via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Sunday, 24 March 2024 at 09:16:20 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > So, yes, you've run into a problem that it would be nice to
> > have a better fix for, but even if we could negate attributes
> > in general,
