Nick Sabalausky Wrote:
> "Tony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Walter Bright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >> 1. GC programs can be faster
> >>
> >> 2. GC programs can use less memory
> >>
> >> 3. GC programs can b
Tony wrote:
That's why I think GC should be an opt-in rather than an opt-out
choice. That's a key characteristic of C++: opt-in. And I really, really
like that level of creative freedom.
I've used a GC with C++ (both the Boehm one and one I wrote myself). The
idea that GC is opt-in in C++ is
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Before I begin, know that the things I'm saying here are not meant as
attacks. It's just that your post has a rambling, semi-off-topic feel
to it and so I'll do the same ;)
> When I went to college, there was a BIG push to indoctr
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:28 PM, Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Kagamin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Tony Wrote:
>>
>>> I'm reading a very old feature list of D and it says that D has struct
>>> member alignment control "to ensure compatibility with exter
"Tony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Walter Bright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> 1. GC programs can be faster
>>
>> 2. GC programs can use less memory
>>
>> 3. GC programs can be guaranteed to be memory safe
>>
>> 4. GC pro
Reading the D feature list and "value propositions", I find much to my own
way of thinking (and wonder if any of my own issues found there way into D's
requirement list) as to what would be a great language. Right now, I'm not
developing software. Well OK, I am, but not "real" software: I am dev
"Walter Bright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Tony wrote:
>> Please clarify for me the mem mgmt of D: is the garbage collector
>> optional or not? Just allowing me to replace "getmorecore()" or something
>> like that and then having the collector on top of that i
Hello TomD,
John Reimer Wrote:
[...]
My quickfix:
- Snip
#!/bin/bash
# makemaker: create a Makefile in every subdir that contains
# .d files.
# Use like this:
# makemaker > all.mak
# and set up DC, DCSYSFLAGS, DCFLAGS, OBJEXT in the top
# Makefile
for d in `find $1 -type d`; do
cd $d
ls
Hello Andrei,
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:55 PM, John Reimer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Bill,
I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
than the size of exes. The size of exes can be reduced using hacks
like upx, but there is no fix for the
"Kagamin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Tony Wrote:
>
>> I'm reading a very old feature list of D and it says that D has struct
>> member alignment control "to ensure compatibility with externally imposed
>> data formats". So, questions: 1. How does one use that?
>
Chad J wrote:
Hell, just the naive version of inserting assert( c !is null, ... );
before dereferences would be extremely awesome. I've already spent too
much of my life on this crap.
Yup, yup; agreed. Thankfully, Windows raises a structured exception for
an AV, and using the Team0xf backtra
BLS wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:55 PM, John Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Bill,
I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
than the size of exes. The size of exes can be reduced using hacks
like upx, but
There's an unanswered question on Stack Overflow about D. Anyone cares to
write a response?
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/289087/applications-development-with-d-language
"""
For those who had developed applications with D,
* which libraries did you use to build your application?
* t
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I know this has been brought up many times, but I think possibly the
usefulness of this feature has been underestimated, and its cost
overestimated.
Consider several points:
1. check for null needs to be done only when the source of the variable is
unknown.
2. seg
Hello Jarrett,
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Jeffrey Rennie
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John Reimer wrote:
Hello Bill,
I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
than the size of exes. The size of exes can be reduced using hacks
like upx, but there is no fix fo
15.11.08 в 01:47 Frits van Bommel в своём письме писал(а):
Denis Koroskin wrote:
Am I doing something wrong?
As was mentioned, 'm' is just a local variable once inside the loop.
This works though:
-
foreach (i, m; this.tupleof) {
writefln(this.tupleof[i].offsetof);
}
-
Ah, y
15.11.08 в 00:30 Steven Schveighoffer в своём письме писал(а):
"Denis Koroskin" wrote
I'm doing some meta stuff and came across a few problems.
First of is described here:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2454
Bug reports without actual errors listed in them (i.e. 'try this and
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Julio César Carrascal Urquijo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Julio César,
ECMAScript 2
ECMAScript 4
I was typing up a snarky comment at the same time you posted this ;)
How dare you being snarky!
"Steven Schveighoffer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In addition, I'd propose that the compiler does a static check to see if a
> null dereference definitely will happen. e.g:
>
> C c;
> c.method(); // should be a compile error.
>
> Ran into this again, and again,
Denis Koroskin wrote:
Am I doing something wrong?
As was mentioned, 'm' is just a local variable once inside the loop.
This works though:
-
foreach (i, m; this.tupleof) {
writefln(this.tupleof[i].offsetof);
}
-
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
4. Yes, segfault is a loud error, but it's like hearing a gunshot from under
water. It's loud, but you have no idea where it's coming from, or whether a
null dereference is to blame. An assert is much more useful because it
tells you the line of code that fails.
I know this has been brought up many times, but I think possibly the
usefulness of this feature has been underestimated, and its cost
overestimated.
Consider several points:
1. check for null needs to be done only when the source of the variable is
unknown.
2. segfaults can come from other sou
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 6:48 AM, Julio César Carrascal Urquijo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Alexander,
>
>> Julio César Carrascal Urquijo wrote:
>>
>>> Steve Yegge's latest article has a ratter nice quote about D:
>>>
>>> http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html
>>>
>>>
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Julio César Carrascal Urquijo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Julio César,
>
>> ECMAScript 2
>>
>
> ECMAScript 4
I was typing up a snarky comment at the same time you posted this ;)
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:55 PM, John Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hello Bill,
> >>
> >>
> >>> I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
> >>> than the size of exes. The size of exes can be reduced using hacks
Hello Julio César,
ECMAScript 2
ECMAScript 4
Hello Alexander,
Julio César Carrascal Urquijo wrote:
Steve Yegge's latest article has a ratter nice quote about D:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html
"D's a really beautiful language. By rights it should be the next
C++. However, C++ programmers won't have it bec
Julio César Carrascal Urquijo wrote:
Steve Yegge's latest article has a ratter nice quote about D:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html
"D's a really beautiful language. By rights it should be the next C++.
However, C++ programmers won't have it because it's garbage c
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I added an "isizeof" proposal to the issue tracker maybe two years ago.
Feel free to vote it up if you'd like.
But W will say "it's already accessible through __traits." Not to
sound fatalistic
"Denis Koroskin" wrote
> I'm doing some meta stuff and came across a few problems.
>
> First of is described here:
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2454
Bug reports without actual errors listed in them (i.e. 'try this and see
what happens') will probably be ignored. It would do y
Denis Koroskin:
> First of is described here:
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2454
Just a note, the result is correct if you replace this line:
writefln(typeof(m).stringof);
With:
writefln(typeid(typeof(m)));
Bye,
bearophile
Steve Yegge's latest article has a ratter nice quote about D:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html
"D's a really beautiful language. By rights it should be the next C++. However,
C++ programmers won't have it because it's garbage collected (even though
it can be disab
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:55:08 +0300, Denis Koroskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I'm doing some meta stuff and came across a few problems.
First of is described here:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2454
Second one is slightly different and this time I am less sure whether it
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:55:08 +0300, Denis Koroskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I'm doing some meta stuff and came across a few problems.
First of is described here:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2454
Second one is slightly different and this time I am less sure whether it
I'm doing some meta stuff and came across a few problems.
First of is described here:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2454
Second one is slightly different and this time I am less sure whether it
is a bug.
The following code is indetended to print offsets of all its members:
I have an interesting issue, that makes me curious on how D handles it.
consider the following:
==
module List;
template NodeTraits(NodeType)
{
static NodeType getNext(NodeType v) { return v.next; }
}
class List(NodeType, Traits=NodeTraits!(NodeType))
{
privat
Jarrett Billingsley:
> But W will say "it's already accessible through __traits." Not to
> sound fatalistic, but do you honestly think this would be added to D1?
Generally I think that having a fully frozen language (D1), that can't accept
improvements, is bad.
And I think that in an open source
A few years too late to by why isn't all classes objects, an instance of a
special virtual class called Class.
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 08:55:29 +1300, Jarrett Billingsley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Tomas Lindquist Olsen w
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
>>
>> Denis Koroskin wrote:
>>>
>>> I can't find a way to get a class sizeof property - it returns 4 (32bit
>>> pointer size) always. I tried many ways but still can't figure out how to do
>>> this
Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
Denis Koroskin wrote:
I can't find a way to get a class sizeof property - it returns 4
(32bit pointer size) always. I tried many ways but still can't figure
out how to do this. Documentation says that
".sizeof applied to a class object returns the size of the clas
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 21:06:39 +0300, Tomas Lindquist Olsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Denis Koroskin wrote:
I can't find a way to get a class sizeof property - it returns 4 (32bit
pointer size) always. I tried many ways but still can't figure out how
to do this. Documentation says that
".s
Denis Koroskin wrote:
I can't find a way to get a class sizeof property - it returns 4 (32bit
pointer size) always. I tried many ways but still can't figure out how
to do this. Documentation says that
".sizeof applied to a class object returns the size of the class
reference, not the class in
I can't find a way to get a class sizeof property - it returns 4 (32bit
pointer size) always. I tried many ways but still can't figure out how to
do this. Documentation says that
".sizeof applied to a class object returns the size of the class
reference, not the class instantiation."
Is i
Kagamin schrieb:
> Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:41 PM, huurd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> the disassemble file is a lot repeat like "ADD [EAX],AL";
>>>
>> That's just 0s.
>
> Hmm... Are they 4kb-long, I wonder?
What does that mean? Are those stuffed space that get
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
enum Uninitialized { yeahIKnow }
Hahaha, brilliant! :D
Is there interest for such a thing?
Yes, absolutely. I use lots of stack allocations and the vision of an
overflow is always lurking somewhere in the shadows... EASTL has a stack
allocator, so we must have
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Jeffrey Rennie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Reimer wrote:
>>
>> Hello Bill,
>>
>>
>>> I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
>>> than the size of exes. The size of exes can be reduced using hacks
>>> like upx, but there is no fix
Just to fix a little misunderstanding:
Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2008-11-13 00:53:50 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
with me for a minute. I'm doing so for the following reasons: (a) I'm
essentially writing this post in negative time;
By this I meant I don't have time (t < 0), not that I was writing
dolive дµ½:
> Some people to convert jdo2.2 for rdbms to d ?
>
> http://www.datanucleus.org/
> http://www.datanucleus.org/products/accessplatform_1_1/index.html
If the ORM too cumbersome, the convert an ADO.NET or VCL's dbx to d also
John Reimer wrote:
Hello Bill,
I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
than the size of exes. The size of exes can be reduced using hacks
like upx, but there is no fix for the long build times as far as I
know.
--bb
Totally agree. The size is just an annoyanc
I'm sorry but a private import is not a private module. A private import is
seen as private by external modules and as such cannot be accessed. Also the
import would be meaningless if it changed the access privileges of any module
since by your logic public import would change private functions
Tony Wrote:
> I'm reading a very old feature list of D and it says that D has struct
> member alignment control "to ensure compatibility with externally imposed
> data formats". So, questions: 1. How does one use that?
align attribute
> 2. Is it accepted
> practice in D programming to write/r
Frits van Bommel wrote:
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Frits van Bommel escribió:
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Now that D2 is being developed, I don't know how much time it will
take until it is finished. Once it is, what will happen to D1? Will
anyone still use it?
I think I might keep using it for a wh
On 2008-11-13 00:53:50 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Michel Fortin wrote:
Everywhere I said there was no need for named regions, I also said
named regions could be kept to ease the syntax. That said, I'm not so
sure named regions are that good at simplifying the syntax.
On 2008-11-09 08:59:18 -0500, Christopher Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Michel Fortin wrote:
I don't see a problem at all. The compiler would expand the lifetime of
x to the outer scope, and do the same for y. Basically, the compiler
would make it this way in the compiled code:
int *
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 02:14:23 + (UTC)
John Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello huurd,
>
> > I use dwt+dwtx, a hello word exe size is 22M, after I use upx the size
> > is 800kb.
> >
> > exe file appears to be a lot of meaningless repeat, how to remove it?
> >
>
>
> 22M is distastefull
//--
//start file A.d
module A;
public class Base{}
public void baseFunction{}
//end file A.d
//--
//-
//start file B.d
module B;
private import A;
public void FunctionB(Base x); //at least this is illegal. Because ...
public Base FunctionElse(); /*This is als
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Frits van Bommel escribió:
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Now that D2 is being developed, I don't know how much time it will
take until it is finished. Once it is, what will happen to D1? Will
anyone still use it?
I think I might keep using it for a while yet. D2 has some feat
Kagamin Wrote:
> Yonggang Luo Wrote:
>
> > I means to support for this, because of this, then we can hidden something
> > that we don't want to see.
> >
> > When you just want to see that API, and not the detail implement.
> > And also it can reduce the redundant thinking about what does this m
I'm reading a very old feature list of D and it says that D has struct
member alignment control "to ensure compatibility with externally imposed
data formats". So, questions: 1. How does one use that? 2. Is it accepted
practice in D programming to write/read structs to/fro, say a disk file,
wit
John Reimer Wrote:
[...]
My quickfix:
- Snip
#!/bin/bash
# makemaker: create a Makefile in every subdir that contains
# .d files.
# Use like this:
# makemaker > all.mak
# and set up DC, DCSYSFLAGS, DCFLAGS, OBJEXT in the top
# Makefile
for d in `find $1 -type d`; do
cd $d
ls *.d >/
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 02:04:55 -0600, Andrei Alexandrescu
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Bill Baxter wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:55 PM, John Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Hello Bill,
>>>
>>>
I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
than the size of e
Marcin Kuszczak wrote:.
> If you or someone else wanted to help in such a framework (I will use
> probably BSD license) I will put code somewhere, so it will be possible
> to work on it together. In such a case please drop me an email. First
> thing to do is to rethink architecture and found even
Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:41 PM, huurd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the disassemble file is a lot repeat like "ADD [EAX],AL";
> >
>
> That's just 0s.
Hmm... Are they 4kb-long, I wonder?
Christopher Wright pisze:
Marcin Kuszczak wrote:
...
My db access layer solves above problems.
You have me drooling in anticipation.
Well, this solution works and really solves above mentioned problems for
me. I use it with real application and it works great.
But indeed it really might b
Hello Bill,
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:55 PM, John Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hello Bill,
I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
than the size of exes. The size of exes can be reduced using hacks
like upx, but there is no fix for the long build times as fa
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:55 PM, John Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Bill,
I think the build time of dwt apps is a much bigger issue right now
than the size of exes. The size of exes can be reduced using hacks
like upx, but there is no fix for the long build times
66 matches
Mail list logo
