Re: Mono-D 0.3.5
I need some help with Mono-D. I am on Linux 64 and I try to use both DMD 2.958 and GDC-4.6.3 However, I find difficult to: -set the Toolchain per project; apparently, only global option (Edit->Preferences->Other->D->Compiler Toolchains) exists -add libraries per project; again, only global option (Edit->Preferences->Other->D->Compiler Toolchains->Default Libraries exists) -the GDC toolchain keeps passing some unknown parameters to the compiler: for example, for the "Debug ARguments"->"Executable", the passed arguments are: -g -debug $sources $libs $includes -od$objectsDirectory -of"$exe" of which all of "-debug" and "-od$objectsDirectory" and "-of"$exe"" are unknown to gdc (and similar for the others Build configurations) And finally: what should I put in that "Default Libraries" test box for DMD and for GDC toolchains to link with some C libraries that the gcc accepts as "-lmediastreamer" and "-lortp"? I should mention they are shared libraries: /usr/lib/libmediastreamer.so and /usr/lib/libortp.so, so there is no .a file that DMD could access. Compiling with gdc from the command line and adding -lmediastreamer -lortp works! Why Mono-D cannot be convinced to create such a simple compilation line? I use MonoDevelop 2.8.0.6.3 with (apparently) the latest Mono-D, ie. 0.3.5, installed according to: http://mono-d.alexanderbothe.com/?page_id=9 Thank you
Re: UFCS for D
On Apr 3, 2012 10:19 AM, "deadalnix" wrote: > > Le 03/04/2012 09:58, Rory McGuire a écrit : > >> Andrei and Walter's proposal does not break existing code because it >> makes folders into modules. >> > > Yes, I was explaining why a solution is needed here. > > I think the public import method is better than the one from Walter and Andrei, which is lacking in some aspects. To me that proposal is public importing. Just without breaking code. I also like it because it reminds me of __init__.py
Re: UFCS for D
On Apr 3, 2012 10:44 AM, "James Miller" wrote: > > On 3 April 2012 19:58, Rory McGuire wrote: > > Andrei and Walter's proposal does not break existing code because it > > makes folders into modules. > > Completely off topic, but can you please refrain from top-posting? Its > not a big deal, just generally quoting above you is preferred. > > Because it breaks the natural flow of conversation > Why shouldn't you top-post? > > -- > James Miller Sure
Re: OSCON 2012 session: "Generic Programming Galore using D"
On 2012-04-03 16:59, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: I'm not sure, but recording conferences is quickly becoming the default. I found a link to the video clips from the last year's conference. I hope they'll record this one as well. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: OSCON 2012 session: "Generic Programming Galore using D"
On 4/3/12 9:42 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2012-04-03 16:30, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: I'm glad to announce that OSCON 2012 (http://oscon.com/oscon2012) has approved my session proposal "Generic Programming Galore using D". Hope to see many of you there! Andrei Cool, will this be recorded and put online? I'm not sure, but recording conferences is quickly becoming the default. Andrei
Re: OSCON 2012 session: "Generic Programming Galore using D"
On 2012-04-03 16:30, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: I'm glad to announce that OSCON 2012 (http://oscon.com/oscon2012) has approved my session proposal "Generic Programming Galore using D". Hope to see many of you there! Andrei Cool, will this be recorded and put online? -- /Jacob Carlborg
OSCON 2012 session: "Generic Programming Galore using D"
I'm glad to announce that OSCON 2012 (http://oscon.com/oscon2012) has approved my session proposal "Generic Programming Galore using D". Hope to see many of you there! Andrei
Re: Modern COM Programming in D
On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 07:49:28 UTC, Sam Hu wrote: Sorry the link http://dpxml-lio/d is unreachable from my side (maybe someone blocked it :P).Could you please provide an alternative place for download? Appreciated. Regards, Sam Most of his code isn't available as it was kind of under Microsoft. However I revived Juno for D2 awhile ago (still need to play with it myself). Juno provides some nice tools and API. https://github.com/JesseKPhillips/Juno-Windows-Class-Library http://dsource.org/projects/juno
Re: UFCS for D
On 3 April 2012 19:58, Rory McGuire wrote: > Andrei and Walter's proposal does not break existing code because it > makes folders into modules. Completely off topic, but can you please refrain from top-posting? Its not a big deal, just generally quoting above you is preferred. Because it breaks the natural flow of conversation Why shouldn't you top-post? -- James Miller
Re: UFCS for D
Le 03/04/2012 09:58, Rory McGuire a écrit : Andrei and Walter's proposal does not break existing code because it makes folders into modules. Yes, I was explaining why a solution is needed here. I think the public import method is better than the one from Walter and Andrei, which is lacking in some aspects.
Re: UFCS for D
Andrei and Walter's proposal does not break existing code because it makes folders into modules. On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:43 AM, deadalnix wrote: > Le 02/04/2012 18:00, Jacob Carlborg a écrit : > >> On 2012-04-02 16:31, Don Clugston wrote: >> >>> To be brutally honest, I don't think that's got much to do with the >>> language. It's got to do with Phobos adopting the Big Ball Of Mud design >>> pattern. There's no reason for the existing modules to be so huge. Eg, I >>> created std.internal.math so that the math modules would stay small. >>> Not only are the modules huge, they import everything. >> >> >> I couldn't agree more. >> > > I did noticed that, but this isn't the only problem. > > >>> I'd like to see some attempt to fix the problem within the language >>> right now, before jumping straight into language changes. >> >> >> That's not very hard. It will just break existing code. >> > > Yes, this is the point : refactoring a big module into submodules is hard > because it break a lot of code, which is something we don't want ina > standard lib for instance. > > Not because it isn't possible, but because almost all D code repose on > phobos, so refactoring it into submodules is likely to massively break > existing code.
Re: Modern COM Programming in D
On Wednesday, 25 January 2012 at 06:56:40 UTC, kdmult wrote: On Wednesday, 25 January 2012 at 01:08:04 UTC, Lionello Lunesu wrote: Done: http://lunesu.com/uploads/ModernCOMProgramminginD.pdf Could you correct the URL of your files on the last page? My files http://dpxml-lio/d/ Sorry the link http://dpxml-lio/d is unreachable from my side (maybe someone blocked it :P).Could you please provide an alternative place for download? Appreciated. Regards, Sam
