Re: The Language I Wish Go Was
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 10:51:14 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1814887 Some commentary on D there. I always enjoy a good rant about some language. When I'm intrigued by some language rants are the first things I google. I wish Go, sorry, D had named arguments too. Its a simple feature that nuke a trunkload of function overloading.
Re: The Language I Wish Go Was
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 15:45:55 -0400, bearophile wrote: On the other hand, currently there are many D2 features that are unfinished and buggy, so adding even more stuff is not a good idea. And I think named arguments are a purely additive change. So Walter may add them later when the current features are implemented well enough. Currently it's much more important to focus on eventually needed non-additive changes instead. Very true. I also use named arguments constantly in Python. Since I'm not the only one that would like to have it in D 2.1 I'll go into gredy mode and add that expanding a dictionary as named arguments to a function is pretty useful too, but since in D's hashes the values must be of the same type for a declared hash it would be less useful, except for Variant[string] hashes maybe, which is a little convoluted.
Re: A summary of D's design principles
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 15:26:14 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote: * And as for what D programmers think of other languages, well, it seems I guess D view of C++ could be rendered as an alcoholic father while D view of C++ would be a fashion victim son.
Re: Simple @tagged attribute for unions
On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 06:33:33 -0400, bearophile wrote: The @tagged attribute for unions is an additive change. Even if you don't implement it now, people have the freedom to design and think about it. I hope this forum still can be used to discuss aditive changues. We don't expect Walter et all to rest after the first stable version of D2 :P
Re: What can the community do to help D?
On Sat, 23 Oct 2010 16:09:37 +0100, Peter Alexander wrote: thread about what the best things are that the community can do to help D. And easy target would be to improve the documentation with better explanations for D outsiders and more examples. This way Walter et all could devote more time to coding.
Re: More Clang diagnostic
Walter Bright Wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
> > Another diagnostic feature is to not just use the caret (we have discussed
> > about it time ago) but it also underlines the wrong part:
> >
> > t.c:7:39: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('int' and 'struct
> > A')
> > return y + func(y ? ((SomeA.X + 40) + SomeA) / 42 + SomeA.X : SomeA.X);
> > ~~ ^ ~
>
>
> Yes, we discussed it before. The Digital Mars C/C++ compiler does this, and
> NOBODY CARES.
> Not one person in 25 years has ever even commented on it. Nobody commented on
> its lack in dmd.
> It's a waste of time to implement things nobody cares about.
I think that is a nice feature to have in a compiler. No life-chaging, no
critical, but still nice.
Re: Marketing D [ was Re: GCC 4.6 ]
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 14:12:04 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: Sometimes I feel people are just waiting around, wanting to use D, but waiting for someone else to make the first move. It's like a dance club, where everyone With Python what happened for some years was that some companies were using it for lots of internal project, but not disclosing its use, for fear that the upper management could scream, "whats that python crap! That is not java! " I know because I worked on one of them (a fortune 100 bank). The same happens with lots of other technologies inside Big Corps (MySQL comes too my mind too), they are first used by programmers and people that know their job in a semi stealth way and later they are accepted by the people whose main job is internal company politics and can't tell the difference of a ref from a pointer. I'm not saying this is the case with D2, I would not use it my daywork production code yet (but my play project at home is already over 5000 lines of code and the last version of dmd fixed all the bugs I stumbled on while developing it), but this is surely going to happen a lot once D2 stabilizes.
Re: DMD source overview?
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:34:47 -0400, "Nick Sabalausky" wrote:
> So does everyone else; you will be a *
I've always wanted to be a pointer!
Ok, but Try{ ! to be a void* } :)
Re: A summary of D's design principles
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 14:33:30 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: Exactly. Much of that can be summed up as D being intended for professional production use, rather than: Anyway you can't ignore D's productivity. As a newcomer after one week learning and toying with D my productivity is about 70% of the one I have with Python after 8 years doing Python, and higher than the one I've with Java or C++. I've found that the compiler error messages are usually very informative, which helps, but being able to link with C libs is a boost too, compared to Python or Java where you need to write lot more than declarations. Yesterday I translated some Python code (Quixote's scgi.py) to D in a couple hours and now it runs like five times faster (before any optimization or D-ization) using 10% of the.memory. The translation was almost direct, line by line which speaks a lot about D's expresivity (I only missed something like list.remove(item)).
Re: Andrei's Google Talk
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:53:33 +0200, Don wrote: No, but you have to include the license WITH the executable (in the 'documentation and other materials'). Which is fine if in fact there are 'documentation and other materials'. But it would seem to prohibit distribution of a bare executable. You can include it in the about box, in the --help switch, etc. Many programs do it that way and I never heard of any problem with that.
Re: Andrei's Google Talk
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:14:09 -0400, "Steven Schveighoffer" wrote: another company that is completely proprietary. LLVM has some possible connection to interject and say "you have to give LLVM developers credit," even if Walter didn't copy any code. Yeah, it's ridiculous and absurd, Well, Windows NT and 2000 (not sure about the latest versions) included the attribution in the about box. You can't get more commercial than Microsoft. I don't see the problem on including some lines of text on parts nobody looks anyway.
Re: Andrei's Google Talk
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 14:15:40 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: Our choices are for anyone distributing a D app, commercial or not: Ok. I was not arguing for changing D's license to BSD but about not worrying so much about looking at BSD code or incorporating the occasional bit of code. AFAIK the BSD license it's not virical or people using Microsoft network API should include the attribution, which doesn't happen. Same with GPL or LGPL code incorporating code from BSD or all the userspace apps on the Free/Open BSD OSes.
Re: Andrei's Google Talk
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 14:04:54 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: If nobody cares about it, why force it on people? I just don't get it. What's I said that nobody looks there, not that nobody cares. Obviously the authors of the BSD licensed code care. the benefit of the binary attribution clause? Why burden all D developers with this? See my other comment on the thread.
Re: Andrei's Google Talk
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 17:00:23 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: > The problem is, the BSD license *is* viral. If I look at BSD licensed > code, and someone accuses me of incorporating bits of it into Phobos, > then those bits must > be removed or Phobos becomes BSD licensed and so every user gets > infected with > it, too. > > If you say "that'll never happen", consider that twice that exact issue > has come up. > > Linking with a DLL is not viral, but statically linking a BSD licensed > library *is* viral. True. My "AFAIK" was wrong; I stand corrected: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070114093427179 Summary: (a) the BSD appears to require that modifications be distributed only under the terms of the BSD, and that this requirement therefore cascades down to subsequent generations of code; (b) the license does not appear to permit the relicensing of BSD code under the terms of any other license, at least in so far as any restrictions in other licenses would seem not to be binding; (c) there may be some scope for arguing that the term “modification” to the code is restricted or limited in some fashion. However, as the license only permits redistribution of “modifications” the BSD does not permit the redistribution of any derivative work which is not a modification; (d) the BSD does not have a requirement for the distribution of source code. It is not clear whether this means there is a deficiency in the Open Source Definition.
Re: A summary of D's design principles
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 21:28:16 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: be found to tout it, it will be ineffective. This is because everyone touts their language as "more productive". People just see "more productive" and their brain just skips over it without it even entering their conscious thought. Well, in this case I don't believe that D is more productive than Python in the short term (it could be in the long term for big codebases involving several developers). But it is almost as productive while smoking it in performance and resource usage. So it is more like you have the advantages of a natively compiled language without many of the drawbacks.
Re: A summary of D's design principles
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:22:09 -0400, bearophile wrote: The main and maybe only advantage of D over C# is that it's multi-platform. But today the Web is very important, and D can't be used in browers. And performance, (most of the time) . And memory usage.
Re: A summary of D's design principles
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 19:36:32 + (UTC), retard wrote: That's pretty awesome. You have maybe 0.001% of the libraries directly I have a lot more libraries in D than in Python. In C. [bla bla bla, bad sarcasms, bla bla bla] at least 100 times more productive than with Python. You can write 10 lines of code per day. Productivity is not measured by lines of code written. Sometimes a better measure is lines of code removed.
Re: A summary of D's design principles
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 19:36:32 + (UTC), retard wrote: other languages. However, please consider that C# is *higher* level language than D and that means it by definition has better portability to multiple platforms. You already have a C# virtual machine for all major LOL. I've never been able to run any mildly complex application in Mono. And I've tried.
Re: Module-level accessibility
On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 14:28:32 +0200, Don wrote: may lose interest in the language because of it alone. (The others are bug 3516 and 2451). Eh, I was bitten but 2451 yesterday and actually had to change a lot of function signatures and rethink my code to avoid it. I hope is fixed soon. On the other hand, programming with the current state of the D2 compiler is a good mental exercise because you never know when you'll have to redesign something. It's the closer most programmers can get of an extreme sport , I guess.
Re: phobos is failure
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 23:59:20 +1100, Darth Tango wrote: Exackaly. Tango rulez. May the meta-force be beside you. :-) Darth My Lord, how is the migration of Tango to D2 going? The last commit I saw on the experimental branch was pretty old.
Re: On C/C++ undefined behaviours (there is no "Eclipse")
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 17:59:26 + (UTC), retard wrote: I assume all of them (the latest versions, of course) start in less than 3.5 seconds. I pondered this a bit and am now willing to buy Don's magic computer. I really do have need for a laptop that can launch those applications in less than 3.5 seconds. Yes, my 2.40ghz i5 with 6gbs RAM takes about ten seconds to open Eclipse 64bits; I need to get one of those SSDs.
Re: About Andrei's interview, part 3 (on bearophile)
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 16:30:59 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote: I don't know about the rest of people here in the NG, but actually I would hope bearophile would post much less often, especially when its I like to read his posts. If you used a NNTP reader on a smartphone (like, SPAM, the one I wrote for Android) you could reserve these posts for some moments like waiting in a queue or the tea to start boiling ;)
Re: About Andrei's interview, part 3 (on bearophile)
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 16:55:40 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote: Reading newsgroups on phone would suck. I already get a bit uncomfortable reading them on my laptop (without a peripheral monitor or mouse). Not worse than reading email on a phone,trough the experience is course worse than on a computer.
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 10:21:58 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: also positive (see http://tinyurl.com/2ewh8eq). 404 Not Found. Should I open a bug report? ;)
Re: Tuple literal syntax
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 23:04:35 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: (a,0)[0] as how a user could generate a tuple of 1. Awkward, sure, but like I said, I think this would be rare. Python uses: (5,) Which is a lot better IMHO
Re: About Andrei's interview, part 3 (on bearophile)
Bruno Medeiros Wrote: > On 06/10/2010 22:47, Juanjo Alvarez wrote: > > On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 16:55:40 +0100, Bruno Medeiros > > wrote: > >> Reading newsgroups on phone would suck. I already get a bit > >> uncomfortable reading them on my laptop (without a peripheral > > monitor or > >> mouse). > > > > Not worse than reading email on a phone,trough the experience is course > > worse than on a computer. > > Oh, it is indeed worse that reading email on a phone, unless you also > use your email to have huge threaded discussions. Doesn't matter for me > in any case, as I also don't read email on a phone. On my app you see the threaded messages in a screen and then when you tap or select a message its opened in another view, fullscreen. Go back and you are again in the threaded listing (which the read messages greyed), or tap Next and you go to the next message in the tree without existing the message view. As I said, not the same level of conveniente than on a computer (you can't see the thread and the message at the same time), but still not so bad.
Re: Tuple assignment
Denis Koroskin Wrote:
> That's because Python is not a strictly typed language. With proper type
> propagation compiler helps you writing code the way in meant to be. E.g.
> the following:
>
> (a, b, c, d) = ('tuple', 'of', 'three')
>
> could be statically disabled, but there is nothing wrong with allowing it
> either: d would be just a no-op, you will know it for sure the moment you
> try using it.
Python has the special symbol "_" which is used exactly as a no-op (you could
call it "foo" it you wanted, but "_"
doesn't create new memory assignments) so you can expand arbitrary tuples
without creating new symbols:
a, b, c, _ = ('tuple', 'of', 'three')
I like the proposal for D, but I fear it could be a source of bugs (you expect
the tuple to expand to 4 values
but silently is expanding to only 3, leaving the fourth unchangued).
Re: Tuple literal syntax
retard Wrote: > Why do tuple fields need a name? Isn't this a new ad-hoc way to introduce > structural typing in D? I often start with tuples, but if it turns out > that the value is used in many places, it will be eventually replaced > with a struct (e.g. coordinates in a gui / gamedev) for better type > safety. Even with structs the need for field names is very rare. The real > need for tuples is in very special cases where the syntax needs to be > light. I found they are useful for callbacks, when you can put, in a tuple, the delegate or function to the callback and in another nested tuple the delegate/function parameters. This way you can define the callbacks to be used along with their parameters, even if their signature is different. You could do the same with the callbacks having variable number and types of args, using a template, but I like this way more.
Re: Big executable?
Justin Johansson Wrote: > Naturally YMMV depending on the language translator that you use, > and, as you have appropriately noted, your mileage experience is > not climate-change friendly. 46 bytes on Linux, using serious hackery; interesting & funny read: http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/software/tiny/teensy.html
Re: Tuple assignment
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 15:14:12 -0400, bearophile
wrote:
This is false both in Python2 and Python3.
What is exactly false on what I said?
a, *bc = ('tuple', 'of', 'three')
Yes, that's the syntax for assignment of the remainder, I was
speaking about *ignoring* the remainder without having it assigned to
the last element which was one of the proposed effects in the message
before mine's.
Re: "in" everywhere
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 15:53:13 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: Except that when you're dealing with generic code which has to deal with multiple container types (like std.algorithm), you _need_ certain complexity guarantees about an operation since it could happen on any container that it's Then, don't use it in std.algorithm or any other code that needs guaranteed complexity, just like now. I don't see the problem with a generic "in" operator, nobody would be forced to use it.
Re: "in" everywhere
Pelle Wrote: > On 10/08/2010 03:18 AM, Juanjo Alvarez wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 15:53:13 -0700, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > >> Except that when you're dealing with generic code which has to deal > > with > >> multiple container types (like std.algorithm), you _need_ certain > > complexity > >> guarantees about an operation since it could happen on any > > container that it's > > > > Then, don't use it in std.algorithm or any other code that needs > > guaranteed complexity, just like now. I don't see the problem with a > > generic "in" operator, nobody would be forced to use it. > > What do you suggest for fast lookup in a container? What is being used now? How can having "in" and not using it (just like now) in functions requiring guaranteed complexity can be worse than not having it? The only drawback I can see to having an "in" operator with all containers is that some programmers would not read the documentation and use it expecting it to be fast. But then that also happens with many other language constructs and some programmers will write crappy algoritms anyway.
Re: "in" everywhere
Steven Schveighoffer Wrote: > On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:18:56 -0400, Juanjo Alvarez > wrote: > > > On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 15:53:13 -0700, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > >> Except that when you're dealing with generic code which has to deal > > with > >> multiple container types (like std.algorithm), you _need_ certain > > complexity > >> guarantees about an operation since it could happen on any > > container that it's > > > > Then, don't use it in std.algorithm or any other code that needs > > guaranteed complexity, just like now. I don't see the problem with a > > generic "in" operator, nobody would be forced to use it. > > That kind of "documentation" is useless, it doesn't prevent use, and it > doesn't feel right to the person who accidentally uses it. When I call > > sort(x); > > and it performs horribly, am I going to blame x or sort? Certainly, I'll > never think it's my own fault :) > > -Steve True! And that's the only drawback I see on generalizing "in", but there are many things in programming languages that doesn't feel right when you don't know the language well. That doesn't mean that D should be the "programming for dummies on rails with a constant automated tutor included" language; if I read well the site, it is mean to be a practical language with the ability to shot yourself in the foot. Still, I don't understand how generalizing "in" could affect std.algorithm et al if they only use "in" for AAs, just like now.
Re: Tuple assignment
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 16:11:53 -0400, bearophile
wrote:
This syntax you have explained doesn't do what you think it does:
a, b, c, _ = ('tuple', 'of', 'three')
That was a typo, I meant to write:
a, b, _ = ('tuple', 'of', 'three')
Re: Why all the D hate?
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:04:57 +0900, Jordi wrote: Sorry, shameful mistake with my shell script skills. It is 50K lines :| Mine is 4000 lines, having started to learn D from Andrei's book three weeks ago. D is not perfect but for me is perfect enough and will no doubt be my favorite general purpose language once we have and stable version.
Re: Is D right for me?
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:46:47 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: working on the project without getting too frustrated over it. QtD is a huge service to the D community. It is. Qt bindings were the first thing I looked for when I started with the language, even with my current project not using any GUI.
Re: Current status of DB libraries in D
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:31:50 -0400, Jesse Phillips wrote: I did actually do a big cleanup and removed a hug amount of obsolete content. It would also be nice to have the libraries sorted by D's version.
Re: What do people here use as an IDE?
Michael Stover Wrote: > Elephant appears dead. Poseidon's activity is extremely low and is still > alpha after 5 years. LEDS is even less active, and DDT doesn't have a release > yet. What do actual D programmers use?-Mike I don't want to sound like one of those Unix condescending users (http://www.perturb.org/images/1/dilbert-unix.png) but with Vim loaded with the plugins "project", "nerd_tree", "nerd_commenter", "yankring", "taglist", "ack", "mru" and "bufferexplorer" I don't feel the need for any (graphical) IDE.
Re: improving the join function
On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:42:35 -0400, "Steven Schveighoffer" wrote: Even though I consider myself a reasonable parser of function templates, sometimes in std.algorithm, I'll stare at a function signature for about 10 minutes trying to figure out whether I can do what I want, give up and finally just try to compile it. I think what might help is spelling out the constraints somehow and especially explaining how the alias parameters work. They are some sort of black magic I don't always understand :) Glad to see I'm not the only one :) The asserts help a lot there; I understood that module better looking at them than with the signatures. Adding more (or just adding some where they're missing). The template constraints is something that could definitely kill more trees in future editions of TDPL.
Re: improving the join function
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 01:30:42 +0200, Juanjo Alvarez wrote: signatures. Adding more (or just adding some where they're missing). Truncated sentence, I wanted to say that adding more asserts would not hurt.
Re: [nomenclature] systems language
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 23:30:02 +1100, Justin Johansson wrote: Touted often around here is the term "systems language". May we please discuss a definition to be agreed upon for the usage this term (at least in this community) and also have some agreed upon examples of PLs that might also be members of the "set of systems languages". A system language allows you to:. + Use pointers + Do manual memory management + Embed assembler + Call the operating system syscalls
Re: [nomenclature] systems language
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:36:48 +0200, "Paulo Pinto" wrote: No one in his perfect mind would say that C is not a systems programming language, but it fails the Juanjo's checkpoint list, hence my reply. In my defense I must say that I never used a C compiler without an inline assembler.
Re: rationale for function and delegate
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 14:42:13 + (UTC), dsimcha wrote: delegate with minimal overhead. This mitigates the situation a lot, since if an API requires a delegate and you have a function pointer, you just do a toDelegate(someFunctionPointer). Sorry for asking here something that should go to D.learn, but how do you do the reverse, that is, getting a function from a delegate? I need that in my project so I can pass it to signal so some Unix signal will trigger a method of an already instantiated object.
Re: duck!
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 09:30:27 +0200, "Christof Schardt" wrote: auto d = as!Drawable(c); My turn: auto d = implements!Drawable(c);
Re: rationale for function and delegate
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 11:57:36 -0400, "Steven Schveighoffer" wrote: auto dg = &obj.method; auto fptr = dg.funcptr; auto context = dg.ptr; Note, you cannot call fptr, you will get a runtime error. Thanks, I'll play with it to see if I can make this work in my code.
Re: rationale for function and delegate
On Sun, 17 Oct 2010 19:15:48 +1000, "Daniel Murphy" wrote: I wrote some code a while back that lets you forward a windows callback to any delegate. It might be a good starting point for what you want. http://yebblies.com/thunk.d Thanks genious ;)
Re: D is really cool
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 16:08:59 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Saturday, 13 May 2017 at 13:55:17 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: anecdotal, there is no statistically significant data. But then Reddit is mostly opinion and advocacy research. In my experience /r/programming has rather poor quality, but /r/cpp and other more specific groups tend to be much better. The only reason to read /r/programming is to get a feeling for trends... I guess. /r/programming is full of Rust fanboys that think that their language is the End of all problems. It's not only D related articles - Swift, Kotlin or any article about any other emerging language will almost have more ocurrentes of the word "Rust" in the comments that the language the article is about. Really toxic community.
