在 Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:30:48 +0800，Daniel Keep
写道:
davidl wrote:
I don't know why there should be different format object files. Couldn't
they be much the same. And the linker finally decide how to link them to
platform specific binary?
MSVC perhaps has already get some idea of this kind,
davidl wrote:
>
> I don't know why there should be different format object files. Couldn't
> they be much the same. And the linker finally decide how to link them to
> platform specific binary?
>
> MSVC perhaps has already get some idea of this kind, the link time code
> generation.
>
> I'm ju
在 Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:11:39 +0800，davidl 写道:
I don't know why there should be different format object files. Couldn't
they be much the same. And the linker finally decide how to link them to
platform specific binary?
MSVC perhaps has already get some idea of this kind, the link time code
I don't know why there should be different format object files. Couldn't
they be much the same. And the linker finally decide how to link them to
platform specific binary?
MSVC perhaps has already get some idea of this kind, the link time code
generation.
I'm just curious why on the X86
在 Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:37:56 +0800，Jarrett Billingsley
写道:
2009/3/22 liyu :
I am not sure it's a bug of tango or dmd, so i post it here. The example
code as below
...
The result is:
Library successfully loaded
Symbol dllprint found. Address = 0x1000308c
mydll.DummyC
mydll.DummyC
tango.core.
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Brian wrote:
This sounds like what "pure" functions are going to be for, right?
That's more or less exactly what they're for.
Only partially. Pure functions are also a valuable tool to aid in
modularizing code and self-documenting
"Jarrett Billingsley" wrote in message
news:mailman.986.1237779483.22690.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
2009/3/22 liyu :
I am not sure it's a bug of tango or dmd, so i post it here. The example
code as below
...
The result is:
Library successfully loaded
Symbol dllprint found. Address = 0x1
Hello Derek,
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:27:09 + (UTC), BCS wrote:
Why does every good D project get more or less abandoned? :(
Because D is a young man thing. "Young" as in about to dive into
school/job/having wife & kids/whatever. We start a project and then
real life kicks in.
I'm 54 yea
2009/3/22 liyu :
> I am not sure it's a bug of tango or dmd, so i post it here. The example
> code as below
>
> ...
>
> The result is:
> Library successfully loaded
> Symbol dllprint found. Address = 0x1000308c
> mydll.DummyC
> mydll.DummyC
> tango.core.exception.assertexcept...@test(35): Assertion
I am not sure it's a bug of tango or dmd, so i post it here. The example
code as below
//file common
module common;
abstract class DummyA {
}
abstract class DummyB : DummyA {
}
abstract class Factory {
DummyB createDummy();
}
//file dll
module mydll;
import common;
import tango.s
Derek Parnell wrote:
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:31:07 -0400, Steve Teale wrote:
void str()
{
auto s = new char[];
}
void main()
{
str();
}
produces:
str.d(3): Error: new can only create structs, dynamic arrays or class objects,
not char[]'s.
What am I missing here, isn't char[] a dynamic
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:09:53 -0400, Robert Jacques
wrote:
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:55:04 -0400, Brian
wrote:
"Windows and Linux Not Well Prepared For Multicore Chips"
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/22/193205&from=rss
I wouldn't completely agree that operating systems
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 03:30:22 +0300, Denis Koroskin wrote:
> I wouldn't recommend using that to anyone. That's a *dirty* hack!
That goes without saying ;-) TO BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS.
--
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
skype: derek.j.parnell
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 16:51:41 -0400, bearophile wrote:
> Trass3r:
>> Why does every good D project get more or less abandoned? :(
>
> My hypothesis:
> - D1 is felt as a dead end, there's not much purpose in writing
> very big programs in it if you will have a D2 beta in some months.
Got it in one
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:27:09 + (UTC), BCS wrote:
>> Why does every good D project get more or less abandoned? :(
> Because D is a young man thing. "Young" as in about to dive into
> school/job/having
> wife & kids/whatever. We start a project and then real life kicks in.
I'm 54 years ol
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:55:04 -0400, Brian
wrote:
"Windows and Linux Not Well Prepared For Multicore Chips"
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/22/193205&from=rss
I wouldn't completely agree that operating systems aren't ready for such
things.
One of the comments reads: "This
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Brian wrote:
> "Windows and Linux Not Well Prepared For Multicore Chips"
> http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/22/193205&from=rss
>
> I wouldn't completely agree that operating systems aren't ready for such
> things.
>
> One of the comments reads: "
"Windows and Linux Not Well Prepared For Multicore Chips"
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/22/193205&from=rss
I wouldn't completely agree that operating systems aren't ready for such
things.
One of the comments reads: "This is the kind of the the compiler could do
just fine .
Kristian Kilpi wrote:
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:14:39 +0200, Christopher Wright
wrote:
Kristian Kilpi wrote:
#includes/imports are redundant information: the source code of
course describes what's used in it. So, the compiler could be aware
of the whole project (and the libraries used) instead
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 03:28:09 +0300, Derek Parnell wrote:
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:31:07 -0400, Steve Teale wrote:
void str()
{
auto s = new char[];
}
void main()
{
str();
}
produces:
str.d(3): Error: new can only create structs, dynamic arrays or class
objects, not char[]'s.
What a
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:31:07 -0400, Steve Teale wrote:
> void str()
> {
>auto s = new char[];
> }
>
> void main()
> {
>str();
> }
>
> produces:
>
> str.d(3): Error: new can only create structs, dynamic arrays or class
> objects, not char[]'s.
>
> What am I missing here, isn't char[] a
Sat, 21 Mar 2009 20:16:07 -0600, Rainer Deyke wrote:
> Sergey Gromov wrote:
>> I think this is an overstatement. It's only abstract write buffers
>> where GC really doesn't work, like std.stream.BufferedFile. In any
>> other resource management case I can think of GC works fine.
>
> OpenGL obje
Actually, dmd is so fast I never bother with these "build" utilities. I
just send it all the files and have it rebuild everytime, deleting all
the o files afterward.
This is very fast, even for larger projects. It appears (to me) the
static cost of calling dmd is much greater than the dynami
The new construct allocates memory. You can "new" anything that
requires a set amount of memory.
This is equivalent to what you want:
auto s = new char[0];
Which creates a new dynamic array with no length (yet.) You can resize
it later. Remember, that is not the same as saying:
char[0] s
BCS wrote:
Hello Trass3r,
Bill Baxter schrieb:
Gregor said he got busy with grad school, so basically nothing is
happening with it. Maybe when summer break time rolls around? But
I'm not holding my breath.
Why does every good D project get more or less abandoned? :(
Because D is a youn
bearophile schrieb:
- D1 is felt as a dead end, there's not much purpose in writing very big
programs in it if you will have a D2 beta in some months.
Yeah, already heard that from various developers. But porting to D2
isn't THAT hard in the end.
- Most D projects are created for nonprofessi
Hello Trass3r,
Bill Baxter schrieb:
Gregor said he got busy with grad school, so basically nothing is
happening with it. Maybe when summer break time rolls around? But
I'm not holding my breath.
Why does every good D project get more or less abandoned? :(
Because D is a young man thing.
Hello Walter,
I keep seeing that as "AARP", the outfit that has started sending me
letters to get me to sign up :-(
That says nothing. I know of people who get those who can't even vote or
drink yet.
Alexander Pánek schrieb:
Do you face any specific problems?
Yes, I posted it in the learn section.
Maybe my dsss setup is wrong, but I can't find any information about
that anywhere.
Trass3r:
> Why does every good D project get more or less abandoned? :(
My hypothesis:
- D1 is felt as a dead end, there's not much purpose in writing very big
programs in it if you will have a D2 beta in some months.
- There are more D projects than D developers. D is mostly a niche language
st
Bill Baxter schrieb:
Gregor said he got busy with grad school, so basically nothing is
happening with it. Maybe when summer break time rolls around? But
I'm not holding my breath.
Why does every good D project get more or less abandoned? :(
Trass3r wrote:
Seems quite inactive? :(
Not quite, since Gregor is very busy with studying.
Do you face any specific problems?
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:20 AM, Trass3r wrote:
> Seems quite inactive? :(
Gregor said he got busy with grad school, so basically nothing is
happening with it. Maybe when summer break time rolls around? But
I'm not holding my breath.
--bb
Seems quite inactive? :(
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:02 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> == Quote from Walter Bright (newshou...@digitalmars.com)'s article
>> Having been involved with occasional contract disputes, I concur that
>> the simpler and more obvious the language is, the better (and the lower
>> your lawyer bill is :-) ).
>
>
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Heh, very true. Of course, both sides could learn a bit from the other.
Sometimes the newest/fanciest/most-popular has loads of drawbacks that the
kids just don't have the experience to notice, and sometimes those more
experienced end up blinded to things that may very we
== Quote from Walter Bright (newshou...@digitalmars.com)'s article
> Having been involved with occasional contract disputes, I concur that
> the simpler and more obvious the language is, the better (and the lower
> your lawyer bill is :-) ).
A perfect argument for the WTFPL!
Georg Wrede wrote:
Young people tend to always choose the absolutely best, while older
people value stability and longevity of tools.
So, yesterday the best was SCons, today it's AAP, what's it gonna be
tomorrow? Old people prefer something like make, that's been around for
some time, and w
Robert Jacques wrote:
Deep in the 'eliminate writeln et comp?' thread there's been a recent
discussion about the confusion over Tango licences. In particular,
regarding the desire that the standard library shouldn't require binary
'copies' (a.k.a. every single executable compiled using it) from
Georg Wrede wrote:
Even if this includes "awkward things" (like having to have a constant
string in the binary, mentioning Tango in the "About" menu item, or
whatever else), it should be stated in layman-understandable terms.
Currently, words like "encumbrance", phrases like "provides broad
r
Hello Denis,
Hmm.. Not a common case, but looks like a bug. Or a clever design
decision :P
Certainly, you can create an int using new:
int* i = new int;
Why can't you create 'char[]'?
T create(T) {
return new T;
}
int* i = create!(int); // fine
char[]* c = create!(char[]); // error
that sh
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:31:07 +0300, Steve Teale
wrote:
void str()
{
auto s = new char[];
}
void main()
{
str();
}
produces:
str.d(3): Error: new can only create structs, dynamic arrays or class
objects, not char[]'s.
What am I missing here, isn't char[] a dynamic array?
Hmm.. N
Steve Teale:
> What am I missing here, isn't char[] a dynamic array?
I suggest you to post such questions to the "learn" newsgroup.
D dynamic arrays aren't objects, they are C-like structs that contain a just
length and a pointer (no capacity). The "new" for them is needed only to
allocate the
void str()
{
auto s = new char[];
}
void main()
{
str();
}
produces:
str.d(3): Error: new can only create structs, dynamic arrays or class objects,
not char[]'s.
What am I missing here, isn't char[] a dynamic array?
"Georg Wrede" wrote in message
news:gq5mp9$2ht...@digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> ""Jérôme M. Berger"" wrote:
>>> Or use a build system that abstracts all the differences for you. I
>>> use SCons all the time to write software that works on both Linux
>>> and Windows and I have no
Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Yea, I was going to mention that, too. As far as I'm concerned "*make" is
the same sort of undead unholy relic as C++. Ie, They've served their use,
but these days they're terrible anachronisms that ju
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
""Jérôme M. Berger"" wrote:
Or use a build system that abstracts all the differences for you. I
use SCons all the time to write software that works on both Linux
and Windows and I have none of the problems you describe:
- SCons is released for both Linux and Windows (and
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
.o on Linux, .obj on Windows.
OBJSUFFIX_win32 = .obj
OBJSUFFIX_linux = .o
...
OS = linux
...
... file$(OBJSUFFIX_$(OS)) ...
This is so totally neat!
I hadn't thought of using macros to generate macros. It's a good
Such things should of course be told to the compiler somehow. By using
the project configuration, or by other means. (It's only a matter of
definition.)
maybe like delphi did it
there is a file called .dpr (delphi project)
which holds the absolute/relative pathes for in project used imports
it
dsimcha wrote:
> Is opImplicitCast (and fixing opCast) anywhere in the pipeline? It seems like
> every time I want to create an interesting library type, lack of
> opImplicitCast prevents me from making its API nice enough to be worth doing.
> In some cases, alias this, which has been proposed,
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 02:16:39 -0400, Walter Bright
wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
This is a serious legal obligation which isn't in the primary DMD
licence or readme. Would it be possible for the licence in druntime to
be unified? (If not, a more prominent notice would be appreciated)
Sean
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 02:16:39 -0400, Walter Bright
wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
This is a serious legal obligation which isn't in the primary DMD
licence or readme. Would it be possible for the licence in druntime to
be unified? (If not, a more prominent notice would be appreciated)
Sean
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:14:39 +0200, Christopher Wright
wrote:
Kristian Kilpi wrote:
#includes/imports are redundant information: the source code of course
describes what's used in it. So, the compiler could be aware of the
whole project (and the libraries used) instead of one file at the
On 2009-03-22 05:08:55 -0400, Kagamin said:
Cristian Vlasceanu Wrote:
I passed a proposal of my own to Walter and Andrei, and that is to have D
coders explicitly state the intent of using a slice with the "ref" keyword;
"ref" is already a legal token in D (at least in 2.0) albeit it is only
v
On 2009-03-22 01:31:28 -0400, "Cristian Vlasceanu"
said:
Another point that I have a hard time getting accross (even to the language
heavy-weights) is that just because it is easy to represent arrays and
slices seemlessly IN THE PARTICULAR CASE OF THE DIGITAL MARS BACKEND it does
not mean it i
Kristian Kilpi wrote:
#includes/imports are redundant information: the source code of course
describes what's used in it. So, the compiler could be aware of the
whole project (and the libraries used) instead of one file at the time.
That's not sufficient. I'm using SDL right now; if I type 'Su
On 2009-03-22 09:45:32 +0100, Don said:
Trass3r wrote:
Don schrieb:
I abandoned it largely because array operations got into the language;
since then I've been working on getting the low-level math language
stuff working.
Don't worry, I haven't gone away!
I see.
http://www.dsource.org
Kagamin wrote:
Cristian Vlasceanu Wrote:
I passed a proposal of my own to Walter and Andrei, and that is to have D
coders explicitly state the intent of using a slice with the "ref" keyword;
"ref" is already a legal token in D (at least in 2.0) albeit it is only
valid in the context of a para
Cristian Vlasceanu:
> arrays and
> slices seemlessly IN THE PARTICULAR CASE OF THE DIGITAL MARS BACKEND it does
> not mean it is going to work as smooth and seamless in other systems.
It seems that LLVM (and GCC) too are able to support them well enough. I think
D was never designed to be a VM-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> Yea, I was going to mention that, too. As far as I'm concerned "*make" is
> the same sort of undead unholy relic as C++. Ie, They've served their use,
> but these days they're terrible anachronisms that just need to be allowe
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
On 2009-03-21 14:23:51 +0100, Daniel Keep
said:
Christopher Wright wrote:
Daniel Keep wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
Daniel Keep wrote:
When was the last time you had to put this in your GCC-compiled
programs?
"Portions of this program Copyright (C) Free Softwar
Cristian Vlasceanu Wrote:
> I passed a proposal of my own to Walter and Andrei, and that is to have D
> coders explicitly state the intent of using a slice with the "ref" keyword;
> "ref" is already a legal token in D (at least in 2.0) albeit it is only
> valid in the context of a parameter lis
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:19:31 +0200, grauzone wrote:
I don't really understand what you mean. But if you want the compiler to
scan for dependencies, I fully agree.
I claim that we don't even need incremental compilation. It would be
better if the compiler would scan for dependencies, and if
""Jérôme M. Berger"" wrote in message
news:gq4pop$154...@digitalmars.com...
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Georg Wrede wrote:
>>> 'Round here we say "maassa maan tavalla", which is probably something
>>> like "When in Rome, do like the Romans do".
>>>
>>> Makefiles aren't just a C(++) thing. Unix has
Trass3r wrote:
Don schrieb:
I abandoned it largely because array operations got into the language;
since then I've been working on getting the low-level math language
stuff working.
Don't worry, I haven't gone away!
I see.
http://www.dsource.org/projects/lyla
Though array operations st
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Walter Bright wrote:
> Georg Wrede wrote:
>> 'Round here we say "maassa maan tavalla", which is probably something
>> like "When in Rome, do like the Romans do".
>>
>> Makefiles aren't just a C(++) thing. Unix has a culture of its own,
>> Windows (I wo
davidl escribió:
在 Sun, 22 Mar 2009 12:18:03 +0800，Andrei Alexandrescu
写道:
grauzone wrote:
My rdmd doesn't know --chatty. Probably the zip file for dmd 1.041
contains an outdated, buggy version. Where can I find the up-to-date
source code?
Hold off on that for now.
Another question, rdmd
67 matches
Mail list logo
