On Wednesday, 23 December 2020 at 16:51:33 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 December 2020 at 16:20:37 UTC, Timon Gehr
wrote:
On 23.12.20 16:37, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 December 2020 at 03:06:51 UTC, 9il wrote:
You, Andrey, and Atila don't care about language features
that have been requested for Mir or even more: rejecting DIP
draft + DMD partial implementation for no real reason.
Out of curiosity, which language features would improve Mir?
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/other/DIP1023.md
This looks like a bug?
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16486
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16465
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10884
and the oldest one reported in 2008
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1807
C++ templates can be resolved, at least at the level Mir needs
this. So, it is a bug in my opinion. But it was said the DIP is
required. I can't write DIP well and was very happy that Stefanos
wrote the DIP and even the druft.
I see how builtin tuples could be useful for a linalg library.
I like how Python allows just using ",". Makes code easier on
the eyes
x,y = y,x
It is also very desired for lazy zipped tensors.
