On 4 May 2012 01:40, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 04-05-2012 02:13, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> On 3 May 2012 16:13, Don Clugston wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/05/12 16:13, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>
On 5/3/12 9:55 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
>
>
> On 28/04/12 20:47, Walter Bright wr
Cool! Thanks!
So all I need to do is remember the indices of functions in the vtable
and extract them manually every time like this, right?
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Mehrdad wrote:
> class Foo
> {
> void test() { }
> }
>
> void main(string[] args)
> {
> auto f = new Foo();
>
On 2012-05-03 20:46, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
I need to get a pointer to a virtual method, which is in turn a
function pointer, being set by virtual method binding.
Can anyone, please, tell me how to get it? Taking the delegate of the
method won't do, because I need it to behave exactly as a virtua
On 2012-05-03 22:36, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Thursday, May 03, 2012 15:30:40 Don Clugston wrote:
What is this D3 thing
As far as I can tell, 'D3' was invented by newcomers to the forums.
I think that what it comes down to is that there are a variety of people who
want features added or
On Friday, May 04, 2012 09:38:24 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-05-03 22:36, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 03, 2012 15:30:40 Don Clugston wrote:
> >> What is this D3 thing
> >> As far as I can tell, 'D3' was invented by newcomers to the forums.
> >
> > I think that what it com
Thanks, I'll look into it.
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-05-03 20:46, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>>
>> I need to get a pointer to a virtual method, which is in turn a
>> function pointer, being set by virtual method binding.
>> Can anyone, please, tell me how to get
Chris Cain wrote:
> On Thursday, 3 May 2012 at 10:03:55 UTC, Jens Mueller wrote:
> >What is a good solution when using member functions on a
> >range's/container's element?
> >
> >Note, the problem only applies when storing structs because
> >classes
> >behave like references.
>
> I think in this
So here's some problems.
I use 'const ref' to pass structs to functions (note: because 'in ref'
doesn't seem to work)
And I often need to return structs by ref too, but I'm having problems:
void test( const ref Thing x ) {} // this works fine. note, 'const ref'
works fine here (in lieu of 'in ref
On Friday, May 04, 2012 11:38:32 Manu wrote:
> I try rearranging the syntax to make the first issue stop complaining:
>
> ref const(Thing) func2() { return gThing; } // this seems to work now, but
> i don't like the inconsistency...
That's thanks to the nonsense that putting const on the left-han
On Thu, 03 May 2012 23:25:26 +0100, H. S. Teoh
wrote:
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 01:51:20PM -0700, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 05/03/2012 01:52 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>Le 03/05/2012 16:50, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
>>Just letting you all know we're working on the frustrating and
>>increasingly freq
On 2012-05-04 01:57, H. S. Teoh wrote:
To be frank, I question the wisdom of not just using ld on Posix
systems... but OTOH, the world *needs* better linker technology than we
currently have, so this projects like this one is a good thing.
He can start with a version for Windows. If as much as
On 2012-05-03 19:21, Mehrdad wrote:
In Windows, you need to register a "window class" before you can
actually create an instance of it.
Mapping this idea to D (and most other languages, I admit) is hard.
Microsoft's solution in C# is pretty ugly.
BTW, what's wrong with using some existing GUI
On 5/4/12 2:26 AM, Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
On 05/03/2012 10:50 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Just letting you all know we're working on the frustrating and
increasingly frequent "Load at xx.xx, try again later" errors when
reading this forum through NNTP. They are caused by a significant growth
On Thursday, 3 May 2012 at 18:47:11 UTC, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
I need to get a pointer to a virtual method, which is in turn a
function pointer, being set by virtual method binding.
Can anyone, please, tell me how to get it? Taking the delegate
of the
method won't do, because I need it to behav
Does this have an overhead over calling virtual method directly?
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:30 PM, jerro wrote:
> On Thursday, 3 May 2012 at 18:47:11 UTC, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>>
>> I need to get a pointer to a virtual method, which is in turn a
>> function pointer, being set by virtual method bi
On 2012-05-04 10:38, Manu wrote:
So here's some problems.
I use 'const ref' to pass structs to functions (note: because 'in ref'
doesn't seem to work)
And I often need to return structs by ref too, but I'm having problems:
void test( const ref Thing x ) {} // this works fine. note, 'const ref'
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 09:51:51 UTC, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
Does this have an overhead over calling virtual method directly?
If you call the function directly, it probably gets inlined.
If you call it through a function pointer, it does have some
overhead over calling the virtual method direc
On 4 May 2012 11:46, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Friday, May 04, 2012 11:38:32 Manu wrote:
> > I try rearranging the syntax to make the first issue stop complaining:
> >
> > ref const(Thing) func2() { return gThing; } // this seems to work now,
> but
> > i don't like the inconsistency...
>
> Tha
So, the only overhead in making a virtual call this way over calling
the method directly is exactly 1 extra function call?
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:02 PM, jerro wrote:
> On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 09:51:51 UTC, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>>
>> Does this have an overhead over calling virtual method dire
On 4 May 2012 12:52, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-05-04 10:38, Manu wrote:
>
>> This syntax complains, but it's precisely the same expression I use to
>
> pass an argument in to a function, and it's fine there:
>> remedy\modules\hud.d(35):**Error: function remedy.hud.func without
>> 'this' c
On 4 May 2012 11:46, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> typeof(foo) blah2 = &func;
>
I just spotted the problem:
typeof(&foo) blah = &foo;
Was missing the '&' before the type. This works... However, in my case, I
don't have such a function defined to copy the type from, so it doesn't
help me any :/
On Thursday, 3 May 2012 at 18:55:17 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
On Thu, 03 May 2012 15:29:07 +0200, David wrote:
rdmd? http://dlang.org/rdmd.html
And dvm: https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/dvm
Thanks both for the suggestions. RDMD looks useful, but am I
right thinking I can't run it from anywhe
I have spent some time setting up nginx as a reverse proxy for
vibe, and I thought I might share some of my issues here for now,
just in case it helps someone.
I will assume that you are generally familiar with configuring
nginx, where the files are, how server directives work etc.
The basic
On Thursday, 3 May 2012 at 16:29:48 UTC, Manu wrote:
Are you a visual studio user? Tried VisualD?
If not, tried Mono-D?
EditPad is as far as I go! I tried using Code::Blocks about a
year ago, but couldn't get it to play nicely with the compiler...
Jonathan M Davis:
That's thanks to the nonsense that putting const on the
left-hand side of a
member function is legal, making it so that you _must_ use
parens with const
and return types for the const to apply to the return type
rather than the function.
In Phobos there is a closed enhancem
Hi folks,
it was really good and productive discussion on const and
immutability,
special thanks for those (Jonatan,Steven,Cris,etc) who answered
hard Mehrad's questions and clarified so important topics.
Can I kindly ask you folks to update FAQ on the site to have
ability for newcomers to
On 2012-05-04 12:09, Manu wrote:
Ah, of course! I didn't spot that >_<
Thanks.
I suppose technically, 'ref' can lead to the same ambiguity. This must
be the core of the problem. ref needs to be supported with parentheses?
I'm not sure, since you can't declare a variable as "ref" I think the
* using `try_files`, nginx complains that you can't use proxy_pass
inside a named location (like `@vibe`), which means you can't use
try_files to serve arbitrary static files, hence the massive list of
extensions.
why not doing:
root /path/to/static
location / {
try_files $uri @app_proxy
On 2012-05-04 12:37, Iain Staffell wrote:
Thanks both for the suggestions. RDMD looks useful, but am I right
thinking I can't run it from anywhere unless I'm able to mess with PATH
variables?
DVM will handle this for you.
I can't figure out where to get started with DVM, so will give that a
On Fri, 04 May 2012 02:45:03 -0400, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently doing some manual memory management and as the delete
keyword is deperecated I want to replace it with a custom Delete
template. I now need to destroy a array of structs, this however seems
only be possible by
On 4 May 2012 14:49, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-05-04 12:09, Manu wrote:
>
> Ah, of course! I didn't spot that >_<
>> Thanks.
>>
>> I suppose technically, 'ref' can lead to the same ambiguity. This must
>> be the core of the problem. ref needs to be supported with parentheses?
>>
>
> I'm no
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 11:49:44 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-05-04 12:09, Manu wrote:
Ah, of course! I didn't spot that >_<
Thanks.
I suppose technically, 'ref' can lead to the same ambiguity.
This must
be the core of the problem. ref needs to be supported with
parentheses?
I'm not
On Fri, 04 May 2012 01:13:07 -0400, Mehrdad wrote:
Hmm... how exactly do you use RTInfo? (Is it usable yet? All I see is a
void* and a dummy template.)
You have to fill in object.di's RTInfo(T) to be whatever you want. As I
said, it's very beta, intended as a hook to use for more precise
On Fri, 04 May 2012 05:00:10 -0400, Regan Heath
wrote:
Opera does this right too :)
Yeah, I still have all my sent posts in opera...
One thing that annoys me though, if a message doesn't get sent, it stays
in your outbox. Then when you double-click on it to edit/resend, it's
been refo
Am 04.05.2012 14:18, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 02:45:03 -0400, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently doing some manual memory management and as the delete
keyword is deperecated I want to replace it with a custom Delete
template. I now need to destroy a array of stru
On 05/04/2012 10:38 AM, Manu wrote:
So here's some problems.
I use 'const ref' to pass structs to functions (note: because 'in ref'
doesn't seem to work)
And I often need to return structs by ref too, but I'm having problems:
void test( const ref Thing x ) {} // this works fine. note, 'const re
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 12:45:23 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
This should work:
const(Thing) function()ref blah2 = &func;
Except that it does not, because 'ref' is not currently a valid
function 'storage class'. This seems to be an issue that
deserves a bug report.
For ref functions, 'ref' is pa
On Fri, 04 May 2012 08:38:21 -0400, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
Am 04.05.2012 14:18, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 02:45:03 -0400, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently doing some manual memory management and as the delete
keyword is deperecated I want to replace it with
On Fri, 04 May 2012 09:14:11 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
I remember that __dtor does the wrong thing, and I advocated it should
do the same thing as calling xdtor, but it didn't go anywhere.
See this bug report:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5667
-Steve
So I do a lot of module scanning via allMembers, and I'm consistently
running into an awkward problem:
module test.blah;
static this()
{
foreach(m; __traits(allMembers, test.module))
{
// m is a string, the only way I know to address the thing m references
is: mixin(m), and this can't be
On Thu, 03 May 2012 19:47:24 -0400, Trass3r wrote:
I'm interested in starting a project to make a linker besides optlink
for dmd on windows.
Imho changing dmd to use COFF (incl. 64 support) instead of that crappy
OMF would be more beneficial than yet another linker.
+1
-Steve
IMHO this should compile:
---
mixin template T() { final void f() { } }
class A { mixin T ta; }
class B : A { mixin T tb; }
---
these asserts should pass:
---
mixin template T(string s) {
string f() { return s; }
}
class A {
mixin T!"T1" ta1;
mixin T!"T2" ta2;
mixin T!"T";
}
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 01:46:21AM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Friday, May 04, 2012 11:38:32 Manu wrote:
> > I try rearranging the syntax to make the first issue stop complaining:
> >
> > ref const(Thing) func2() { return gThing; } // this seems to work now, but
> > i don't like the incons
On 4 May 2012 16:53, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 01:46:21AM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Friday, May 04, 2012 11:38:32 Manu wrote:
> > > I try rearranging the syntax to make the first issue stop complaining:
> > >
> > > ref const(Thing) func2() { return gThing; } // this
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 03:34:00PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> __traits(getMember, test.module, m);
>
> should work.
Though you should probably test for non-data members before attempting
to use getMember (try __traits(compiles, __traits(getMember, ...))).
T
--
Democracy: The triumph of pop
On 4 May 2012 16:34, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> __traits(getMember, test.module, m);
>
> should work.
>
Tried that:
static if( is( __traits( getMember, mixin( moduleName ), m ) == interface )
)
{
pragma( msg, "Is an interface: " ~ m );
}
On 4 May 2012 17:01, Manu wrote:
> On 4 May 2012 16:34, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>
>> __traits(getMember, test.module, m);
>>
>> should work.
>>
>
> Tried that:
>
> static if( is( __traits( getMember, mixin( moduleName ), m ) == interface
> ) )
> {
> pragma( msg, "Is an interface: " ~ m );
> }
>
On 4 May 2012 17:01, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 03:34:00PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> > __traits(getMember, test.module, m);
> >
> > should work.
>
> Though you should probably test for non-data members before attempting
> to use getMember (try __traits(compiles, __traits(getM
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 10:05:54 UTC, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
So, the only overhead in making a virtual call this way over
calling
the method directly is exactly 1 extra function call?
I guess so. You are calling a function that does a virtual call
and doesn't do anything else, so what other
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 05:03:36PM +0300, Manu wrote:
> On 4 May 2012 17:01, Manu wrote:
>
> > On 4 May 2012 16:34, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> >
> >> __traits(getMember, test.module, m);
> >>
> >> should work.
> >>
> >
> > Tried that:
> >
> > static if( is( __traits( getMember, mixin( moduleName ),
On 4 May 2012 17:09, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 05:03:36PM +0300, Manu wrote:
> > On 4 May 2012 17:01, Manu wrote:
> >
> > > On 4 May 2012 16:34, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> > >
> > >> __traits(getMember, test.module, m);
> > >>
> > >> should work.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Tried that:
> >
Great! Thanks!
After I'm done with this, I'll propose adding it to Phobos.
A genuine dynamic dispatch mechanism would be very useful.
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 6:04 PM, jerro wrote:
> On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 10:05:54 UTC, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>>
>> So, the only overhead in making a virtual call t
Did you see my solution? I think it's what you're looking for...
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 10:05:54 UTC, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
So, the only overhead in making a virtual call this way over
calling
the method directly is exactly 1 extra function call?
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:02 PM, jerro wrote
Yes! Your solution looks exactly like what I wanted. The reason why I
considered additional alternatives is because your solutions looks
very fast (YES!!!), but not very portable and safe, so after testing,
if it turns out to be inconsistent, I'll have to use something else.
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 04:57:30PM +0300, Manu wrote:
> On 4 May 2012 16:53, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
> > Yeah, I've recently started building the habit of always using
> > parentheses with const applied to a type, in order to make it less
> > confusing with const as applied to a function. Even tho
Ah okay. Yeah it's not 'safe' at all... but I think the '6' comes
from the number of members that Foo has. If you figure out how
many methods there are in the v-table, then that should get you
the index (though don't quote me on this... you should look at
the compiler source code if you want to
This idea is too obvious and I suppose I'm the only one not knowing it,
but I have never seen it's implementation. Why?
The idea:
1. `Object` class has hidden `isAlive` field which is true since
construction and up to finalization.
2. Every method asserts that the object is alive first.
3. The
Oh okay, I see. Let me try it. :)
@Everyone: Haha thanks for pointing me to the existing libraries.
:) I'm doing this more for learning than anything else, so I'm
trying to solve these problems myself instead of just using
another library.
And it seems to be going well:
class Window
{
On 05/04/2012 03:00 PM, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 12:45:23 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
This should work:
const(Thing) function()ref blah2 = &func;
Except that it does not, because 'ref' is not currently a valid
function 'storage class'. This seems to be an issue that deserves a
bu
On Fri, 04 May 2012 10:19:08 -0400, H. S. Teoh
wrote:
Argh... this is really annoying. So I tried all sorts of combinations of
function pointer syntax in order to get the correct type for a ref
function that returns const(T), but couldn't. So I decided to let the
language tell me itself what
I'm not going to cherry-pick methods in any case. I'll have all
methods analyzed at compile time, by iterating over the overloads of
each method and have them searched in the vtable to get their indices
at launch time. It'll be easy to construct a dynamic virtual method
call.
On Fri, May 4, 2012 a
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 14:34:20 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
It is an attribute:
int x;
ref {
int foo(){ return x; }
int bar(){ return x; }
}
ref:
int qux(){ return x; }
static assert(typeof(&qux).stringof == "int function() ref");
Thanks, this is news to me! I never noticed that ref was ac
On 05/04/2012 04:53 PM, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 14:34:20 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
It is an attribute:
int x;
ref {
int foo(){ return x; }
int bar(){ return x; }
}
ref:
int qux(){ return x; }
static assert(typeof(&qux).stringof == "int function() ref");
Thanks, thi
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 14:57:14 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
What would be the meaning of
void foo(ref void function() fn) { }
?
Parameter storage classes can only go before the type, while
function attributes can also go after the parameter list (of the
function pointer or delegate for this c
Am 03.05.2012 22:51, schrieb Ali Çehreli:
On 05/03/2012 01:52 PM, deadalnix wrote:
Le 03/05/2012 16:50, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
Just letting you all know we're working on the frustrating and
increasingly frequent "Load at xx.xx, try again later" errors when
reading this forum through NNTP
Am 04.05.2012 15:14, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 08:38:21 -0400, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
Am 04.05.2012 14:18, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 02:45:03 -0400, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently doing some manual memory management and as the delete
On Fri, 04 May 2012 11:20:41 -0400, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
Thanks, but thats exactly what I'm currently doing. This still is a
indirect function call, and I hoped that there is a way to directly call
the destructor.
Then no, there isn't a better way. If you look at that bug report, you
On 4 May 2012 18:07, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 14:57:14 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>
>>
>> What would be the meaning of
>>
>> void foo(ref void function() fn) { }
>>
>> ?
>>
>
> Parameter storage classes can only go before the type, while function
> attributes can also go after th
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 15:49:03 UTC, Manu wrote:
It's very counter intuitive to mark the _function_ ref, rather
than it's
return type.
It is a function attribute, so it makes perfect sense. The rest
is an issue of documentation/education.
I agree it may not be optimally intuitive, but I d
On 4 May 2012 18:55, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 15:49:03 UTC, Manu wrote:
>
>> It's very counter intuitive to mark the _function_ ref, rather than it's
>> return type.
>>
>
> It is a function attribute, so it makes perfect sense. The rest is an
> issue of documentation/educatio
On Thursday, 3 May 2012 at 23:47:26 UTC, Trass3r wrote:
I'm interested in starting a project to make a linker besides
optlink for dmd on windows.
Imho changing dmd to use COFF (incl. 64 support) instead of
that crappy OMF would be more beneficial than yet another
linker.
My vision is to cr
On 04/05/2012 13:27, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 01:13:07 -0400, Mehrdad wrote:
Hmm... how exactly do you use RTInfo? (Is it usable yet? All I see is
a void* and a dummy template.)
You have to fill in object.di's RTInfo(T) to be whatever you want. As I
said, it's very bet
On 05/04/2012 02:27 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> FWIW it seemed to be just a configuration issue.
Perhaps not solved yet? I just hit the same problem about fifteen
minutes ago.
Ali
On Friday, May 04, 2012 18:28:51 Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
> This idea is too obvious and I suppose I'm the only one not knowing it,
> but I have never seen it's implementation. Why?
>
> The idea:
> 1. `Object` class has hidden `isAlive` field which is true since
> construction and up to finalizat
On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:08:44 -0400, Simon wrote:
On 04/05/2012 13:27, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 01:13:07 -0400, Mehrdad
wrote:
Hmm... how exactly do you use RTInfo? (Is it usable yet? All I see is
a void* and a dummy template.)
You have to fill in object.di's RTInf
On Fri, 04 May 2012 18:57:44 +0200, foobar wrote:
On Thursday, 3 May 2012 at 23:47:26 UTC, Trass3r wrote:
I'm interested in starting a project to make a linker besides optlink
for dmd on windows.
Imho changing dmd to use COFF (incl. 64 support) instead of that crappy
OMF would be more ben
On 5/4/12, foobar wrote:
> How about augmenting the object format so that libraries would be
> self contained and would not require additional .di files? Is
> this possible optlink by e.g. adding special sections that would
> be otherwise ignored?
How would you use a library you don't even have t
On 5/4/12, Trass3r wrote:
>> I'm interested in starting a project to make a linker besides optlink
>> for dmd on windows.
>
> Imho changing dmd to use COFF (incl. 64 support) instead of that crappy
> OMF would be more beneficial than yet another linker.
Hear hear.
But I wouldn't mind seeing a li
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 17:52:54 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 18:57:44 +0200, foobar wrote:
On Thursday, 3 May 2012 at 23:47:26 UTC, Trass3r wrote:
I'm interested in starting a project to make a linker
besides optlink for dmd on windows.
Imho changing dmd to use COFF (incl. 64
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 17:54:47 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 5/4/12, foobar wrote:
How about augmenting the object format so that libraries would
be
self contained and would not require additional .di files? Is
this possible optlink by e.g. adding special sections that
would
be otherwise
On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:54:38 -0400, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
On 5/4/12, foobar wrote:
How about augmenting the object format so that libraries would be
self contained and would not require additional .di files? Is
this possible optlink by e.g. adding special sections that would
be otherwise i
On 5/4/12, foobar wrote:
> The di files are mostly meant to be machine read (e.g. the
> compiler) and this belongs as part of the library file in order
> to provide ease of use and maintain the relationship between the
> binary code and it's interface.
>
> maintaining two sets of files that could
On 5/4/12, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> Ever heard of Java?
Ever heard of not requiring a bring-your-quadcore-to-its-knees IDE?
On Fri, 04 May 2012 14:31:24 -0400, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
On 5/4/12, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Ever heard of Java?
Ever heard of not requiring a bring-your-quadcore-to-its-knees IDE?
This is a totally false comparison :) Java's storage of its interface in
its object files has noth
On 5/4/12, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> What I'm saying is, it's completely possible to store the API in binary
> format *in* the object files, and use documentation generators to document
Yes but then you need to *modify* existing tools in order to add a new
feature that extracts information fr
On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 18:30:32 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 5/4/12, foobar wrote:
The di files are mostly meant to be machine read (e.g. the
compiler) and this belongs as part of the library file in order
to provide ease of use and maintain the relationship between
the
binary code and it
On 05/04/12 15:57, Manu wrote:
> Yeah I really hate this too. I'd like to see const(T) strictly enforced,
> considering the potential for ambiguity in other situations.
>
> But I'm still stuck! :(
> How can I do what I need to do?
If 'auto' is not an option:
alias ref const(S) function() FT;
On Fri, 04 May 2012 19:29:11 +0200, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Friday, May 04, 2012 18:28:51 Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
This idea is too obvious and I suppose I'm the only one not knowing it,
but I have never seen it's implementation. Why?
The idea:
1. `Object` class has hidden `isAlive` fie
On May 4, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
> This idea is too obvious and I suppose I'm the only one not knowing it, but I
> have never seen it's implementation. Why?
>
> The idea:
> 1. `Object` class has hidden `isAlive` field which is true since construction
> and up to finalizatio
On Fri, 04 May 2012 14:48:04 -0400, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
On 5/4/12, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
What I'm saying is, it's completely possible to store the API in binary
format *in* the object files, and use documentation generators to
document
Yes but then you need to *modify* existing
On 5/4/12, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> Current tools: read .di files and extract API
> new tools: read .dobj files and extract API.
>
> I'm not really seeing the difficulty here...
I thought he meant libraries that are only distributed in binary form.
So no .di files anywhere. Maybe I misunder
On Fri, 04 May 2012 14:50:06 -0400, Simen Kjaeraas
wrote:
I believe the idea was that it'd blow up if you use it unwisely. clear
might
do that, but if you're unlucky, it'll 'work' just fine, giving you
problems
later.
clear zeros out the vtable, so it's highly unlikely it "just works".
On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:07:43 -0400, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
On 5/4/12, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Current tools: read .di files and extract API
new tools: read .dobj files and extract API.
I'm not really seeing the difficulty here...
I thought he meant libraries that are only distribute
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:46 PM, foobar wrote:
> On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 18:30:32 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>
>> On 5/4/12, foobar wrote:
>>
>>> The di files are mostly meant to be machine read (e.g. the
>>> compiler) and this belongs as part of the library file in order
>>> to provide ease of
On 2012-05-04 14:27, Manu wrote:
You can declare a variable as ref in the parameter list, that's where
the ambiguity could arise, same with const.
Yes, but I thought this was a variable of some kind and not a parameter.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2012-05-04 15:57, Manu wrote:
But I'm still stuck! :(
How can I do what I need to do?
Hmm, I think this starts to look like a voldemort type :) . A type which
isn't possible to declare.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2012-05-04 16:19, H. S. Teoh wrote:
typeof(&func) fp =&func;
And lo and behold, it works!! So it's very stupid, but if you at least
have an exemplary function that you'd like to make a function pointer
out of, you can use this workaround to name its type.
Yeah, I recommend filing a
On 2012-05-04 16:19, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Argh... this is really annoying. So I tried all sorts of combinations of
function pointer syntax in order to get the correct type for a ref
function that returns const(T), but couldn't. So I decided to let the
language tell me itself what the type is:
On 2012-05-04 16:31, Mehrdad wrote:
Oh okay, I see. Let me try it. :)
@Everyone: Haha thanks for pointing me to the existing libraries. :) I'm
doing this more for learning than anything else, so I'm trying to solve
these problems myself instead of just using another library.
And it seems to
On 2012-05-04 18:57, foobar wrote:
How about augmenting the object format so that libraries would be self
contained and would not require additional .di files? Is this possible
optlink by e.g. adding special sections that would be otherwise ignored?
That would be nice. I guess that would mean
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
