davidl wrote:
From a commercial basis for Walter, it may be easier to glue a C#
frontend against the DMD backend to create a native C# compiler.
Mono has AOT compilation. On the other hand, I've experienced more ICE
per minute with Mono than with dmd. This is partially due to dmd's near
mono
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
That's not an "equiv of". It's "completely missing the point of". Each
"using" costs one new scope and one level of indentation which makes it
non-scalable. Indentation is *expensive*. I t
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2009 16:14:29 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Leandro Lucarella" wrote in message
news:20090518141908.gb9...@burns.springfield.home...
bearophile, el 18 de mayo a las 04:33 me escribiste:
Andrei, I agree that "with" is d
grauzone wrote:
Look at this for example:
> writefln("%s", is(typeof(rtzx) == char));
This compiles even if rtzx doesn't exist. But you probably wanted to
check the type of rtzx, not it if rtzx exists. If you mistyped rtzx, the
compiler will never tell you.
You can do 'is(typeof(rtzx)) && is
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
BCS escribió:
Hello Georg,
So, in a way, Microsoft may be right in assuming that (especially when
their thinking anyway is that everybody sits at a computer that's
totally dedicated to the user's current activity anyhow) preposterous
horse power is (or, should be) availa
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
As we are about JSON blip has also one.
It does not aim at replacing tango's one, which is really fast, and is
the way to go if you want to read JSON to an in memory representation of
it.
On the other hand if you want to use JSON for serialization, i.e. to
read into your
Daniel Keep wrote:
Better than having a crash with OPTLINK with no error message nor
indication of what the problem is, where the only reproducible test case
is 2MB worth of object files and which has already cost you four days of
trying fruitlessly to work around it, still without a solution.
A
Don wrote:
grauzone wrote:
Incidentally, here, or in D.learn, somebody was asking for symbolic
derivation with D templates. I think one of the excercises in SICP
was to write a lisp snippet that did just that.
Awesome stuff, through and through.
An awesome way to hit compiler bugs, huh?
We
Georg Wrede wrote:
bearophile wrote:
Georg Wrede:
arra[i] = arrb[i++];
arra[i++] = arrb[i];
I'm not sure that such dependences are good code.
By stating a definite order between lvalue and rvalue, you
would actually encourage this kind of code.
I agree that putting such things in code is bad
Georg Wrede wrote:
If we were smart with D, we'd find out a way of leapfrogging this
thinking. We have a language that's more powerful than any of C#, Java
or C++, more practical than Haskell, Scheme, Ruby, &co, and more
maintainable than C or Perl, but which *still* is Human Writable.
More i
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Sean Kelly" wrote in message
I also don't understand why professors seem to always choose academic
textbooks on the subject when I know there are infinitely better trade
books available (which I generally already own).
Hear hear!!
There's also another phenomenon I've
Sean Kelly wrote:
== Quote from Steve Teale (steve.te...@britseyeview.com)'s article
I'm trying to write a JSON parser/generator. If anyone else is doing the same,
can we collaborate?
I've got one, but I wrote it for work so I'm not sure if I can release
it. I'd be happy to offer suggestions
downs wrote:
Consider this type:
struct StringPosition {
size_t pos;
void opImplicitCast(out size_t sz) {
sz = pos;
}
void opImplicitCast(out bool b) {
b = pos != -1;
}
}
Wouldn't that effectively sidestep most problems people have with find
returning -1?
Or am I missing som
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Sean Kelly wrote:
Brad Roberts wrote:
There's only one book that I can remember ever working through the
exercises
on.. and that's even a stretch of the term exercise: Exceptional C++.
For any of you that develop c++ code and haven't read that book.. I
highly
r
Brad Roberts wrote:
An interesting side effect of these changes is that thread startup cost is
going to increase. Yet more reasons to avoid globals and global
initialization.
-- Brad
It'll further promote use of threadpools. This isn't terribly safe
because the globals for that thread are
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
If this is important to you, wouldn't it be more appropriate to look
into making the patch complete instead of complaining about it?
Andrei
The poster of the patch believes it to be complete. Walter looks at it
and believes that it is not. It adds perhaps one minut
BCS wrote:
Hello Derek,
On Wed, 13 May 2009 01:04:19 + (UTC), BCS wrote:
Ah! One of my favorite qwerks of the English language, how to refer
to a specific single someone of unknown gender without insulting
them: "it"?
I hate it but what can I do?
Use "they". Sure, its wrong but everyon
Georg Wrede wrote:
Knowing what (*seriously excuse* the wording here) fascists the FSF guys
are, they obviously assume similar behavior of any opposition. That
explains why they appear paranoid and unreasonable in their demands of
the copyright statements for any code even remotely considered f
Walter Bright wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
Awesome! I'll add this to wiki4d. Might I also suggest adding it to
some reasonable location on digitalmars.com and bugzilla?
I think the wiki is the best place.
What do you do about examples that should explicitly not compile? For
examp
Walter Bright wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
However, if a patch exists, there is only one excuse for not including
it: lack of testing.
And there is one huge reason that nobody submits additional test cases
to your DMD test suite -- you've never released it, or even specified
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Christopher Wright (dhase...@gmail.com)'s article
dsimcha wrote:
Is there any hack in D that will allow overriding of privacy settings on
classes? For example, I really need a feature that will force D to let me
mess with the internals of a class that I ha
Walter Bright wrote:
Luís Marques wrote:
Two years ago, I tried to use a particular construct and DMD
incorrectly detected that a statement was not reachable [1]. OK, D1
had been frozen earlier that year, so I thought it would be only a
matter of time until the higher priority stuff had been t
davidl wrote:
The module package system still stays in the state of the C age. It's
file oriented. I think there's no more sound package system than C# one.
The namespace and distributed packaging is a must nowadays and the
compiler should be project oriented and take project information as the
dsimcha wrote:
Is there any hack in D that will allow overriding of privacy settings on
classes? For example, I really need a feature that will force D to let me
mess with the internals of a class that I have no control over from a
subclass, effectively making private members protected.
I know
Michiel Helvensteijn wrote:
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
It's
incredibly rare that I have to assign the same value to multiple
targets, and when I do, the little time I could save by not typing the
second assignment is offset by the increased time it takes me to look
for assignments to a variable
Georg Wrede wrote:
Derek Parnell wrote:
I am not saying that D1 is not finished, but I am saying that DMD-v1
is not
finished.
D1 documentation says X is a function of D1.
DMD-v1 does not implement X.
Therefore DMD-v1 is not a complete implementation of D1.
Even though D1 is finished,
Tomasz Sowiński wrote:
This phrase gave me an idea for a small feat:
deprecated(2009-4-19) void foo();
Compiling references to the deprecated declaration *before* the deprecation
date would result in a *warning*.
Compiling the deprecated declaration OR any reference to it *after* the date
wou
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
About the null references, most people seem to agree that the right way to
fix that is with some sort of "non-nullable". But there's a lot of
disagreement on exactly how non-nullables should work.
And whether they *can* work. D2 has struct constructors, so structs can
h
torhu wrote:
On 10.05.2009 00:05, mpt wrote:
I keep making 2 mistakes in my D programs, and fixing them feels
troublesome.
1. Null references. I get a segfault and gdb is useless (ldc thing
maybe).
2. Exceptions. It prints the msg nicely, but it's unhelpful in tracing
the real cause of error.
Tyro[a.c.edwards] wrote:
On 5/9/2009 11:24 AM, grauzone wrote:
beyond and I'm quite sure that I'm not the only one. For all the
Naysayers out there... Keep saying nay and go the hell away. D2 is
just where it is supposed to be. Let’s not end up in the same mess we
did by trying to make impatient
torhu wrote:
On 09.05.2009 00:29, Christopher Wright wrote:
Open source projects tend to have to support wider ranges of compilers.
I've seen OSS projects where they prioritized issues specific to
gcc-3.4.2 as highly as any other issue, even if the developers typically
used the 4.x b
Sean Kelly wrote:
== Quote from Steve Teale (steve.te...@britseyeview.com)'s article
OK so for those who crave stability there is D1.x, but when all the focus
appears to be on D2, what level of confidence is afforded to
D1 users. Can a project Manager cross his heart and say that D1 will still
Steve Teale wrote:
This is the sort of answer that will kill D. The guy comes back after 2 years, asks a
straight question, and get's told "business as usual, we're still arguing among
ourselves about what it should be".
Last week I asked Andrei what DMD2/Phobos to use, looking for something
Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Wed, 06 May 2009 02:36:21 +0400, Christopher Wright
wrote:
I see no use case for having one module in multiple files, though --
the only benefit would be private access to things defined in other
files. I've never been big on making stuff private, though.
The
grauzone wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
It *is* possible, by use of public imports.
Are you splitting one file into many? Public import the other modules.
Are you merging many files into one? Leave the other files with just a
public import of the merged file.
Nice story. In reality you
Georg Wrede wrote:
Yigal Chripun wrote:
*but*, I do think that splitting one file that got too big over time
or uniting a bunch of small files into one should be possible.
This would be especially good for us. D is mainly developed by
individuals, and there projects tend to grow organically -
Fractal wrote:
That's debatable. The hateful thing about namespaces is that they give
you absolutely ZERO clue as to where any particular thing is coming from.
If I see "tango.io.device.File", I know exactly where the source for
that module is.
-- Daniel
Yes it is true. But the thing is no
Steve Teale wrote:
Christopher Wright Wrote:
Frank Benoit wrote:
Walter Bright schrieb:
Steve Teale wrote:
If I want a catch-all catch, which should I be using.
Out of habit I use Exception, but if I do that then I will miss some
things thrown from Phobos.
Is it the intention that
dolive wrote:
may the ibm support the d language £¿
If you asked them for a support contract, they would probably accept,
but charge you lots of money. Since it's rather far afield of anything
else they do, this would likely be around $2**20 annually (at least
$2**17, I'd say -- it be a ful
Frank Benoit wrote:
Walter Bright schrieb:
Steve Teale wrote:
If I want a catch-all catch, which should I be using.
Out of habit I use Exception, but if I do that then I will miss some
things thrown from Phobos.
Is it the intention that Throwable be used for this purpose?
Yes.
Why is it p
superdan wrote:
Steve Teale Wrote:
bearophile Wrote:
So I agree with nearly nothing you have (badly) expressed.
Bye,
bearophile
Who is this guy?" He must be putting his messages through one of those web
sites that translate into strange dialects - fry my ass!
fer tat i recommend da geor
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Brad Roberts (bra...@puremagic.com)'s article
dsimcha wrote:
D2 is a complex language, but it's not complex in a haphazard way. It's
complex
because it statically proves stuff about your code (const, etc), and allows
extremely powerful, generic user-defined types
Derek Parnell wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:23:52 -0400, superdan wrote:
(actually who cares what he wrote ...)
"superdan", when you grow up I'm certain that you will be an important
person. I just hope we don't have to wait too long.
On those occasions on which I've read a post by superdan,
Robert Fraser wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
- a mock object library that doesn't force me to gouge my eyes out
(which I could probably do by now)
- an ORM library comparable to NHibernate
http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmocks
Not sure if the Sleeper is "comparable to NHiber
Rainer Deyke wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
Rainer Deyke wrote:
Don't forget:
+ Supports timely destruction of contents (i.e. RAII).
These are collections. RAII doesn't matter when you have a garbage
collector and the only resource you have is memory, unless you're qui
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
There have been quite a few bugs in the I/O functions because the
infrastructure underneath them has gone through a few major revisions.
As Don said, D2 is an alpha and it cannot be held to the stability
standards of a finished product.
Then I should wait a few revi
Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
I'm lucky, I'm a technical lead/manager at work, so I get to say "for
this project, we're using D." And then it happens. Muhahaha. We're a
small shop but I enjoy my small amount of power.
I could do that, but D is lacking essentials for me:
- a message bus that i
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I can't wait for D to take over the world, so I no longer have to write
in this horrid language ;)
C# is pretty reasonable. I see a fair number of things in recent
versions that have been in D for a while, and some other vaguely neat
things that D doesn't have on o
Rainer Deyke wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
1. Value semantics (arrays are like int)
Don't forget:
+ Supports timely destruction of contents (i.e. RAII).
These are collections. RAII doesn't matter when you have a garbage
collector and the only resource you have is memory, unless you're
Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
I read until I hit this:
4. if (o__SiteContainer0.<>p__Site1 == null)
And I was suddenly hit with a huge feeling of "I'm glad D doesn't look
like this." Seriously, I hope this is some sort of decompiled syntax
and not actually valid.
It's decompiled: "This
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
s/recursive/transitive/
Litmus test: recursive could recurse forever. Transitive never does.
I have used the word recursive because the functions I have designed
(and I think they are designed correctly) call themselves until
Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Georg Wrede wrote:
There's an illusion. And that illusion comes from the D newsgroups
having "wrong" names.
The D2 newsgroup should have a name like "D2 discussion -- for D
language development folks, enter at your own risk". And a *D1*
newsg
Frank Benoit wrote:
M$ and Java have chosen to use utf16 as their default Unicode character
encoding. I am sure, the decision was not made without good reasoning.
What are their arguments?
Why does D propagate utf8 as the default?
Unicode did not match ISO10646 when Java and Windows standardiz
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
2. I haven't measured, but the cost of the indirect call is large enough
to make me suspect that opApply is not as efficient as it's cracked to
be, even when compared with an iterator.
When you know the type beforehand or can use templates, that is, rather
than wrap
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
Simple solution: put the array definition in object.d and try
implementing arrays with reference counting or manual memory management.
I think stored slices break manual memory management, even with a
dedicated slice type; but they should
Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 18:04:32 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
1) In what way would it help to give the owner an identity?
For example, on an implementation that doesn't want gc, they'd need
the owner for deterministic destruction.
Why is a si
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It looks we can't make it with only T[].
Citation needed. If this is a continuation of a previous discussion, a
link to the previous discussion will suffice.
I grant that appending to an array is expensive. Make Array a
user-defined type and we can see what's appr
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
This means replacing a mark/sweep GC with a reference counting GC.
It just means that certain types and constructs are rewritten. The exact
strategy depends on how Ref, Array, and AssocArray are defined.
Probably a good approach is to
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I've discussed something with Walter today and thought I'd share it here.
The possibility of using D without a garbage collector was always
looming and has been used to placate naysayers ("you can call malloc if
you want" etc.) but that opportunity has not been realize
Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2009-04-20 07:25:43 -0400, Christopher Wright said:
BCS wrote:
Hello Christopher,
The utility is when you are looking for methods to invoke via runtime
reflection, you can determine that a given function is one of these
runtime opDotExp equivalents.
So it is being
BCS wrote:
Hello Christopher,
The utility is when you are looking for methods to invoke via runtime
reflection, you can determine that a given function is one of these
runtime opDotExp equivalents.
So it is being argued that there should be a standard way to do a run
time function invocation
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2009-04-18 22:21:50 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
I did, but sorry, it doesn't make sense and does nothing but continue
the terrible confusion going in this thread.
Then let's try to remove some of that confusion.
Thanks for doing so.
Michel Fortin wrote:
The thing is that the name of that "catchAllHandlerFunc" function needs
to be standardised for it to work with runtime reflection.
I agree with this wholeheartedly.
However, opDotExp would be hamstringed if it were made to serve this
function.
Since classes can implemen
Daniel Keep wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Close a connection gracefully for example, I guess (I mean, send a "bye"
packed, not just close the socket abruptly). Same for closing files
writing some mark or something. They can be risky when finalization is
not
deterministic
Walter Bright wrote:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
You missed the point. I'm not talking about freeing the memory. I'm
talking about finalizers. A finalizer could send a "bye" packet throgh
the
net. That can't be handled by the OS.
That shouldn't be handled by a finalizer. A "bye" packet can be h
bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Yes. The amount of confusion in this thread is staggering.
I think I have misunderstood about the whole thread then. If the string isn't
determined at run time, then this thing isn't useful for my purposes, and it's
not close to the object-C as I was ta
Daniel Keep wrote:
Cool! I suggest the rewrite:
c.unknownmethod(args) -> c.opDotExp!("unknownmethod")(args)
That way you have the option of handling the method name statically or
dynamically.
Careful. If you do that, you need to make sure it's possible to invoke
a given method at runtime. A
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Christopher Wright" wrote in message
news:gsb05g$2in...@digitalmars.com...
Assuming that you are testing the logic of your application, you will
trivially check things like accessing "legnth" rather than "length" --
under the assumption t
Don wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:54:52 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Andrei wrote:
We are discussing a language extension. That language extension will
allow a type to choose flexibility in defining methods dynamically,
while being otherwise integrated syn
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:54:52 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Andrei wrote:
We are discussing a language extension. That language extension will
allow a type to choose flexibility in defining methods dynamically,
while being otherwise integrated syntactically w
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Cool! I suggest the rewrite:
c.unknownmethod(args) -> c.opDotExp!("unknownmethod")(args)
That way you have the option of handling the method name statically
or dynamically.
How would that allow
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"bearophile" wrote in message
news:gsai34$1p9...@digitalmars.com...
Nick Sabalausky:
There are people who swear by the ability of adding methods at runtime
and
changing the inheritance hierarchy dynamically. It makes for a very
fluid
environment.
Personally, I've alwa
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I think there's merit in binding via strings. It makes for very flexible
code that is future-proof, dynamic-linking-friendly, and hot-swappable
without recompiling (e.g. you don't need to recompile because you now
implement an interface etc.) Reflection is very useful
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"davidl" wrote in message
news:op.usje9ia3j5j...@my-tomato...
The benefit is you don't need to write the call function,
...But you do have to write the opDotExp() function. How is that less work
than just writing a dispatch function?
It's more work, but it lets you d
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Yah, glad someone mentioned it :o). The best way is a blend - you can
statically dispatch on some popular/heavily-used names, then rely on a
hashtable lookup for dynamic stuff.
Andrei
You suggest:
auto opDotExp(string name)(...)
{
static if (name == "some
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Cool! I suggest the rewrite:
c.unknownmethod(args) -> c.opDotExp!("unknownmethod")(args)
That way you have the option of handling the method name statically or
dynamically.
How would that allow you to handle the method name dynamically, if
you're passing it as a t
Daniel Keep wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
Daniel Keep wrote:
Use the Tango Variant code. It supports values of any size and doesn't
require knowledge of the compile-time type.
Not so. That was one of three reasons that I wrote my own Variant
previously (the others being toStrin
davidl wrote:
After tweaking dmd a bit litte, i get the dotexp overloading work.
Do want.
With this and extended runtime information, you can create a Variant
that works exactly like the original type, allowing you to call methods
on it without extracting it to the original type, just throwi
Daniel Keep wrote:
Are these methods going to be implemented any time soon? I just
stumbled across these are practically jumped for joy at what they'd
allow me to do. I mean, they return an array of these:
No. They've been there time out of mind and are still not implemented.
They would be s
Daniel Keep wrote:
Use the Tango Variant code. It supports values of any size and doesn't
require knowledge of the compile-time type.
Not so. That was one of three reasons that I wrote my own Variant
previously (the others being toString and sameness comparison).
Hi all,
I finally found some time to work on TypeInfoEx. It's usable, in that
you can view information about a type; but you can't do anything with
that information. One large barrier is the lack of a usable Variant type.
To invoke a function on an object or struct, you need to pass it as
ei
Robert Fraser wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
auto reader = file.byLine!("/[.,]/")();
Why specify anything at compile time when a user could reasonably
generate the value at runtime?
auto reader = file.byLine(readConfig().separator);
Yes, and f
Don wrote:
Paul D. Anderson wrote:
Sounds like someone needs a strong dose of D!!
http://java.dzone.com/articles/why-java-doesnt-need-operator
The comments bounce between "operator overloading is always bad
because you can do idiotic things with it" and "operator overloading
is essential bec
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
auto reader = file.byLine!("/[.,]/")();
Why specify anything at compile time when a user could reasonably
generate the value at runtime?
auto reader = file.byLine(readConfig().separator);
Frank Benoit wrote:
I need to retrieve an instance of TypeInfo from an object instance at
runtime.
TypeInfo info = typeid(obj) // does not work, only compile time
TypeInfo info = obj.classinfo.; // how to navigate to TypeInfo?
Is that possible?
If not, why? And can it be added (D1)?
Ther
Stewart Gordon wrote:
Don wrote:
Stewart Gordon wrote:
That's only because you want to be able to attach alignments to
individual members of a union. And I still don't know why.
I'm not sure why you think unions are so different to structs. They
are identical in most respects -- including
Frits van Bommel wrote:
Stewart Gordon wrote:
Don wrote:
Stewart Gordon wrote:
Surely, align isn't applicable to unions at all. IINM the members
of a union, by design, start at the same offset.
Not so, the alignment of each member should be respected.
But the offset of a union member i
Georg Wrede wrote:
Readln returns a string which contains the line terminator.
Is there a grand reason for this?
Currently there are a few drawbacks with this. The naive user doesn't
expect it, and the seasoned user has to keep stripping it. And then he
has to search the docs (or get hold of
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
dsimcha, el 11 de abril a las 05:21 me escribiste:
== Quote from Leandro Lucarella (llu...@gmail.com)'s article
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 10 de abril a las 16:49 me escribiste:
And Braddr just made a documentation fix, and Walter only commits
portability stuff and an occ
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Lars Kyllingstad wrote:
I think isInfinite!() should be called isInfiniteRange!(). The current
name is, in my opinion, too general.
I'm undecided about this (and similar cases). isInfinite sits inside
std.range, so
BLS wrote:
Zz wrote:
Hi,
Are there any plans for a logging library in Std Phobos 2.0?
Zz
Why ask. Phobos is a one man show. In other word, Phobos is an ego-lib.
In case that you want something special, ask the tango folks. ( beside,
logging is avail. there for quite a while)
Björn
It's a
Sean Kelly wrote:
Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 08:33:11PM -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
and apt-get replies with: "Couldn't find package virtualbox"
Evidently, my system is completely hosed now.
Aren't package managers swell?
Waste of bloody time that would better be spent on
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Christopher Wright wrote:
Then take this example:
void foo(int i)
{
if (i < 0) return;
in { assert (i != -1; }
}
This is confusing.
There's a simple solution: define the function body grammar to only
allow in{}
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Christopher Wright wrote:
No. This proposed syntax change is quite misleading. Contracts cannot access
the function's local variables, but it looks like they can. Contracts are
executed at particular times, but that syntax makes
Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 00:51:49 +0400, Christopher Wright
wrote:
bearophile wrote:
But isn't a syntax like the following better? To me it looks more
logic, because in{} and out(){} are part of the function, and there's
no need of a special syntax for the bod
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Christopher Wright wrote:
In this regard, Unix has a standard interface: text. This turns out to be
usable >90% of the time. It has the advantage that you can write a program
in any language that can process text. But it
bearophile wrote:
But isn't a syntax like the following better? To me it looks more logic,
because in{} and out(){} are part of the function, and there's no need of a
special syntax for the body (and the 'body' keyword):
long squareRoot(long x) {
in {
assert(x >= 0);
}
out
Daniel Keep wrote:
Powershell is designed to work with managed (.NET) objects. It can
dynamically introspect these objects and pull them apart, mutate them,
convert them, etc. Imagine if every file on a UNIX system also carried
around a reference to its own parser, and a description of how to
i
Yigal Chripun wrote:
ever heard of powershell? it is in fact a superior design for a shell
compared to most unix shells.
also, have you ever heard of rush? http://rush.heroku.com/
I tried rush. Its documentation is lacking. The lack of a working
directory is annoying. The lack of formatting
Yigal Chripun wrote:
ever heard of powershell? it is in fact a superior design for a shell
compared to most unix shells.
I have tried it briefly. Too briefly to give a good analysis of it.
The GUI is better than that of cmd.exe, but not anywhere near as good
as, say, GNOME Terminal. (It's sti
101 - 200 of 483 matches
Mail list logo
