Re: Beerconf April 2021
On Friday, 23 April 2021 at 16:53:03 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote: *This* **reminds** ~~me~~ __that__ I'm yet to give markdown a try from my own mail client. It seems you're missing a header. From Steve's post: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=no; markup=markdown -- Simen
Re: From the D Blog: A Pattern for Head-mutable Structures
On Friday, 3 July 2020 at 07:58:31 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote: On Thursday, 25 June 2020 at 13:17:55 UTC, jmh530 wrote: Good piece. I've been following the recent thread, but this really helped make some things clear. Do you have a link to that thread (or title) please? Pretty sure it's the stuff in std.v2020.algorithm (https://forum.dlang.org/post/rcqk4f$1dou$1...@digitalmars.com). That discussion was part of the reason I got the post published right now. (the other reasons being I'd had it lying about for a long while, and a DConf 2020 presentation just wasn't going to happen) -- Simen
Re: addle 0.1.0 - argument-dependent lookup for UFCS functions
On Sunday, 21 June 2020 at 00:06:12 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
import addle;
import std.range;
// Import a type from another module
import mylib: MyStruct;
// Define range primitives for MyStruct
bool empty(MyStruct a) { return false; }
string front(MyStruct a) { return "ok"; }
void popFront(MyStruct a) {}
// MyStruct isn't considered an input range, because
// std.range can't see our UFCS methods.
static assert(isInputRange!MyStruct == false);
// ...but extending it makes those methods visible.
static assert(isInputRange!(Extended!MyStruct));
void main()
{
import std.range: take, only;
import std.algorithm: equal;
MyStruct myStruct;
// Now we can use all of the standard range algorithms
assert(
myStruct.extended
.take(3)
.equal(only("ok", "ok", "ok"))
);
}
As a demonstration of what you can do in D, I love this. Maybe
one day I'll even find a use for it. Good work!
--
Simen
Re: Release D 2.090.0
On Tuesday, 7 January 2020 at 10:30:09 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.090.0, ♥ to the 48 contributors. This release comes with the ability to convert lazy parameters to delegates, new intrinsics to force rounding to specific floating point precision, unittest builds that no longer execute main by default, a new GC.inFinalizer API, and various other changes. http://dlang.org/download.html http://dlang.org/changelog/2.090.0.html -Martin Something seems to be wrong with the 2.090.0 Windows installer. After successfully installing, it proceeds to delete every file it has just added. Looking closely at how it happens, it seems that it might actually be caused by the uninstaller deleting itself and the directory it's in. If I wait long after the previous version has been uninstalled before clicking 'next', it doesn't happen. So, how to reproduce: 1) have a previous DMD version installed 2) start the 2.090.0 installer 3) answer yes to uninstalling the previous version 4) quickly finish installing 2.090.0 If you do this with the install folder open in an explorer window, you should see the files disappearing during the uninstall of the previous version, until the only item in the D folder is uninstall.exe. As the new install proceeds more files and folders will be added, and finally they will all be deleted again, sometimes leaving an empty folders, other times a partial installation (I've only once managed to get a partial installation). -- Simen
Re: Flexible Default Function Parameters via structs with Nullable Fields
On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 at 13:10:54 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 at 08:20:29 UTC, JN wrote:
It might be nifty by D standards, but for a person not
familiar with D
Or, as someone familiar with D, I wonder why not just use a
plain struct. D allows you to set initial values for struct
members plainly.
Yeah, though I can see some use cases for a struct with all
nullable fields and a way to combine with a regular version of
that struct. This could be made a lot easier than in the article:
import std.traits : FieldNameTuple;
import std.typecons : Nullable;
struct Partial(T) if (is(T == struct)) {
static foreach (e; FieldNameTuple!T)
mixin("Nullable!(typeof(__traits(getMember, T, e)))
"~e~";");
}
auto combine(T, PT)(T t, PT pt) if (is(PT == Partial!T)) {
T result;
static foreach (e; FieldNameTuple!T)
__traits(getMember, result, e) = __traits(getMember, pt,
e).get(__traits(getMember, t, e));
return result;
}
struct S {
int x,y;
}
unittest {
S a = S(1,2);
Partial!S b;
b.x = 3;
assert(a.combine(b) == S(3,2));
}
Now, for the abomination that is
callMemberFunctionWithParamsStruct!(t, "f")(combined)... It's
just t.f(combined.tupleof) in a bad disguise, and I really can't
see the benefit.
Lastly, the use of a mixin to define the struct ensures you can't
put methods on the struct, thus drastically reducing usability.
All in all, it's a fun beginner's project, but the quality may
not be good enough that it should be on the blog.
--
Simen
Re: DMD metaprogramming enhancement
On Friday, 26 April 2019 at 06:29:04 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
On Thursday, 25 April 2019 at 23:41:32 UTC, Suleyman wrote:
Hello everyone,
I am happy to announce that in the next DMD release you will
be able to more freely enjoy your metaprograming experience
now that a long-standing limitation has been lifted.
You can now instantiate local and member templates with local
symbols.
Example:
---
struct S
{
private int _m;
void exec(alias fun)()
{
fun(_m);
}
}
unittest
{
int localVar;
void set(int i)
{
localVar = i;
}
auto obj = S(10);
obj.exec!set(); // no error or warning
assert(localVar == 10);
}
---
I hope you enjoy!
You have no idea how happy I am to hear this has been fixed! So
many of my designs have been hamstrung by 5710, and it's been
around since the dawn of time.
BTW, at least two people have promised money outside BountySource
to have 5710 fixed:
https://forum.dlang.org/post/gjzrklkxfmgjjdfor...@forum.dlang.org
--
Simen
Re: DMD metaprogramming enhancement
On Thursday, 25 April 2019 at 23:41:32 UTC, Suleyman wrote:
Hello everyone,
I am happy to announce that in the next DMD release you will be
able to more freely enjoy your metaprograming experience now
that a long-standing limitation has been lifted.
You can now instantiate local and member templates with local
symbols.
Example:
---
struct S
{
private int _m;
void exec(alias fun)()
{
fun(_m);
}
}
unittest
{
int localVar;
void set(int i)
{
localVar = i;
}
auto obj = S(10);
obj.exec!set(); // no error or warning
assert(localVar == 10);
}
---
I hope you enjoy!
You have no idea how happy I am to hear this has been fixed! So
many of my designs have been hamstrung by 5710, and it's been
around since the dawn of time.
--
Simen
Re: sumtype 0.8.3
On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 12:52:11 UTC, JN wrote: On Monday, 25 February 2019 at 20:31:43 UTC, Paul Backus wrote: SumType is a generic sum type for modern D. It is meant as an alternative to `std.variant.Algebraic`. Is it a better alternative? Seems like it from the description. If it's objectively better on all fronts, perhaps it should be considered for inclusion into Phobos, as a replacement for the existing Algebraic? It's not a perfect superset of Algebraic and Variant in Phobos, so it's not a strictly better alternative. The feature that is missing is SumType can't hold arbitrary types, only the types specified in its template parameters. However, for the case where the set of possible types is limited, it's strictly better. -- Simen
Re: intel-intrinsics v1.0.0
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 23:26:48 UTC, Crayo List wrote: On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 19:55:05 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote: On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 04:57:29 UTC, Crayo List wrote: However (for those who are unaware) there is an alternative way that is (arguably) better; https://ispc.github.io/index.html You can write portable vectorized code that can be trivially invoked from D. ispc is another compiler in your build, and you'd write in another language, so it's not really the same thing. That's mostly what I said, except that I did not say it's the same thing. It's an alternative way to produce vectorized code in a deterministic and portable way. While you didn't say it was the same thing, you did say it's an alternative that 'is arguably better'. Adding another compiler using another language is arguably worse, so there are tradeoffs here, which Guillaume may have felt were undercommunicated (I know I did). That said, it *is* a good alternative in some cases, and may well be worth pointing out in a thread like this. -- Simen
Re: intel-intrinsics v1.0.0
On Wednesday, 6 February 2019 at 01:05:29 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
"intel-intrinsics" is a DUB package for people interested in
x86 performance that want neither to write assembly, nor a
LDC-specific snippet... and still have fastest possible code.
Neat. Question: On Github it's stated that implicit conversions
aren't supported, with this example:
__m128i b = _mm_set1_epi32(42);
__m128 a = b; // NO, only works in LDC
Couldn't this be solved through something like this:
struct __m128 {
float4 value;
alias value this;
void opAssign(__m128i rhs) {
value = cast(float4)rhs.value;
}
}
--
Simen
5 reasons the D programming language is a great choice for development
I found this article espousing D's strengths today: https://opensource.com/article/17/5/d-open-source-software-development
Re: Blog post: What D got wrong
On Tuesday, 11 December 2018 at 14:38:25 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: On 12/11/18 5:45 AM, Atila Neves wrote: A few things that have annoyed me about writing D lately: https://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2018/12/11/what-d-got-wrong/ Agree with most of this. UFCS for templates would be awesome, but the syntax is trickier, since instantiation uses ! instead of . I can't see how you get around the ambiguities, especially when a template could be a UFCS function. I believe a reasonable case can be made for .! for UFCS - it's currently invalid syntax and will not compile, and ! is the symbol we already associate with template instantiation: alias memberFunctions = __traits(allMembers, T) .!staticMap!Member .!Filter!(isSomeFunction); -- Simen
Re: Update regarding the Nullable issue
On Wednesday, 11 July 2018 at 10:43:40 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote: Destructors are not called for fields embedded in unions. On the one hand this is a horrible, horrible hack. On the other, whee! Not only a horrible hack, but a bug, and something you really can't rely on working in the future. Especially since this behavior is only observed with named unions, not with anonymous ones. I'll also mention section 14.19 2 on the Structs, Unions page (https://dlang.org/spec/struct.html): 2. Unions may not have fields that have destructors. Whether that means it's undefined behavior or the compiler should statically disallow it is up for debate, I guess. -- Simen
Re: Complicated Types: Prefer “alias this” Over “alias” For Easier-To-Read Error Messages
On Monday, 21 May 2018 at 14:48:23 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Nick Sabaluasky's first post to the D Blog is a tip on how to
create an aliased type that keeps its name in error messages.
Nice. Interestingly, the error message references the wrong type
when trying to access static members:
struct MT {
int _payload;
alias _payload this;
}
unittest {
MT a;
a.foo = 3; // Error: no property foo for type MT
MT.foo = 3; // Error: no property foo for type int
}
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18892
--
Simen
Re: Seeking lecturer - D language (Moscow)
On Wednesday, 14 March 2018 at 11:38:20 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: - I owe you a bottle of your favorite beverage and your favorite bug in Bugzilla if you agree ;) https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5710 might be worth it, even if it means moving from friends and a comfy job in Norway... -- Simen
Re: Article: Why Const Sucks
On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 17:41:42 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: Yeah, Andrei has admitted before that this is probably what he would do today, if he were given a second chance to design ranges. But at the time, the landscape of D was rather different, and certain language features didn't exist yet (sorry, can't recall exactly which off the top of my head), so he settled with the compromise that we have today. As they say, hindsight is always 20/20. But it wasn't so easy to foresee the consequences at the time when the very concept of ranges was still brand new. Andrei's 'On Iteration'[0] was published 2009-11-09. Postblits had been in the language for about a year and a half[1], and @disable arrived early 2010[2]. Both features were probably too new to warrant being an integral part of the design of ranges. -- Simen [0]: http://www.informit.com/articles/printerfriendly/1407357 [1]: https://dlang.org/changelog/2.012.html [2]: https://dlang.org/changelog/2.040.html
Re: The Expressive C++17 Coding Challenge in D
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 23:35:36 UTC, Seb wrote:
Someone revived the Expressive C++17 Coding Challenge thread
today and I thought this is an excellent opportunity to revive
my blog and finally write an article showing why I like D so
much:
https://seb.wilzba.ch/b/2018/02/the-expressive-c17-coding-challenge-in-d
It's mostly targeted at beginners as I explain many basic D
features, but maybe it's helpful for beginners looking into D.
Nice! Good overview of many of the good things in D.
Nitpicks:
I used the following rdmd script to generate a simple CSV file
with 10 fields and 10m lines:
rdmd --eval='10.iota.map!(a=> "field".text(a)).join(",")
.repeat(10_00_000).joiner("\n").writeln' > input_big.csv
10_00_000 should probably be 10_000_000.
They are only view on the actual memory and you don’t copy the
array, but just the view on (in D it’s called a slice).
Missing some words here: "only *a* view". "but just the view on"
seems to be missing the second half of the sentence.
There's also a few typos: 'vauge' should be 'vague', 'it
providers' should be 'it provides', 'shot yourself in the feet'
should probably be 'shoot yourself in the foot'
Thanks for writing all this - it's a great intro to the language.
--
Sien
Re: Scott Meyers' DConf 2014 keynote The Last Thing D Needs
On 2014-05-29 03:29, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: 1. The order of the dimensions of multi-dimensional static arrays is backwards in comparison to what most everyone expects. int[4][5][6] foo; is the same as int foo[6][5][4]; and has the same dimensions as auto bar = new int[][][](6, 5, 4); IMO, it's the dynamic array creation syntax that's weird here. The static array syntax is sensible, easy to explain, and consistent with reading the type left to right. I've never used the syntax for creating a multidimensional dynamic array, so I was frankly surprised to see it worked that way. -- Simen
Re: Scott Meyers' DConf 2014 keynote The Last Thing D Needs
On 2014-05-28 13:05, Craig Dillabaugh via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On Tuesday, 27 May 2014 at 21:40:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 5/27/2014 2:22 PM, w0rp wrote: I'm actually a native speaker of 25 years and I didn't get it at first. Natural language communicates ideas approximately. What bugs me is when people say: I could care less. when they mean: I couldn't care less. and: If you think that, you have another thing coming. when they mean: If you think that, you have another think coming. Whats wrong with If you think that, you have another thing coming.? I've always understood it sort of like say your Father saying: If you think that [i.e. you can steal your little brother's ice cream cone], then you have another thing [i.e no ice cream, but maybe the leather strap] coming. It's an old saying, and in more modern English might be phrased If you think that, you have another thought coming, i.e. you'll soon enough see why you're wrong. -- Simen
