Daniel Keep wrote:
You'd have to be mad to use it like that.
I am mad.
struct S
{
int a;
private { size_t size; char[0] data; }
char[] message() { return data.ptr[0..length]; }
size_t length() { return size; }
S* opCall(size_t size)
{
return cast(S*)((new uby
As D is typically a system language, this enhancement might not make it, but I
still think it would be practical.
I've been thinking of a real world example for this, and yesterday found a nice
example to illustrate.
Suppose you would be creating an API to interrogate a database. Now within the
Sjoerd van Leent Wrote:
> Now the compiler knows that it has to do some magic stuff to make the fields
> accessible using strings etc.
>
> I know that it might be possible to do all of this through the vtable,
> classinfo, typeinfo and so on, but it doesn't appear to be very
> straightforward.
D2 has a getMembers method in TypeInfo and ClassInfo that would probably
do the job. Only problem is that the compiler doesn't actually generate
the function for it.
I asked about it a while ago, but never got a response.
Daniel Keep Wrote:
>
> D2 has a getMembers method in TypeInfo and ClassInfo that would probably
> do the job. Only problem is that the compiler doesn't actually generate
> the function for it.
>
> I asked about it a while ago, but never got a response.
I've noticed this message a while ago. I
Bartosz Milewski Wrote:
> Walter Bright Wrote:
>
> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8z3wm/whats_wrong_with_the_thread_object/
>
> The bottom line of this post is that the current Thread object in D should be
> abandoned and replaced by a more primitive "spawn" function. If there a
Sjoerd van Leent wrote:
As D is typically a system language, this enhancement might not make it, but I
still think it would be practical.
I've been thinking of a real world example for this, and yesterday found a nice
example to illustrate.
Suppose you would be creating an API to interrogate
Robert Clipsham Wrote:
> Sjoerd van Leent wrote:
> > As D is typically a system language, this enhancement might not make it,
> > but I still think it would be practical.
> >
> > I've been thinking of a real world example for this, and yesterday found a
> > nice example to illustrate.
> >
> >
== Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schvei...@yahoo.com)'s article
> On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:34:51 -0400, Bartosz Milewski
> wrote:
> > Walter Bright Wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8z3wm/whats_wrong_with_the_thread_object/
> >
> > The bottom line of this post is that t
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 2:38 AM, Daniel Keep wrote:
>
> You'd have to be mad to use it like that.
>
> struct S
> {
> int a;
> private { size_t size; char[0] data; }
> char[] message() { return data.ptr[0..length]; }
> size_t length() { return size; }
>
> S* opCall(size_t size)
> {
DiP2 is here. Check it.
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DiPs
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DiP2
ps code markup is not very nice.
Last release was some time ago, is it still under development?
I like its style, would be a pity if not.
Kagamin:
> DiP2 is here. Check it.
> http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DiP2
It misses the Author field.
Also an optional field for the suggested way to implement something can be
positive.
Bye,
bearophile
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> I think what Jerome is getting at is that we could be getting more
>> mileage out of the xpr1..xpr2 syntax. It would be useful syntax for
>> more than just integral, dense ranges in foreach and slices. The
>> equivale
Trass3r wrote:
Last release was some time ago, is it still under development?
Last change was 3 months so yes but slow. At least it's not dead like
minwin.
I like its style, would be a pity if not.
Great static linked, light weight, tool kit for windows while still
having a lot of featur
Tim Matthews schrieb:
Great static linked, light weight, tool kit for windows while still
having a lot of features.
kinda OT but the dprogramming domain would be a great way to promote d
(from the dfl guy) but it is not really used enough.
Exactly.
Unfortunately I can't get it to run, always
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:14:49 -0400, Trass3r wrote:
Tim Matthews schrieb:
Great static linked, light weight, tool kit for windows while still
having a lot of features.
kinda OT but the dprogramming domain would be a great way to promote d
(from the dfl guy) but it is not really used enough.
Sean Kelly Wrote:
> It would be trivial to implement spawn on top of the Thread object.
Not so trivial, as I would like the spawn function to be a variadic template.
> And
> the reverse would work as well, though it would be less practical. After
> all, some data must be used to represent a t
Bill Baxter:
> Python's are a little annoying in that, like D, you can't use
> them outside of indexing expressions. Can't even use them in loops.
> In NumPy, the numerical library for Python, they've invented some
> quirky objects like numpy.r_ which you index to create a range
> literal. Like
>
Robert Jacques schrieb:
If you're using a recent version of D2, you might have forgotten the
USE_CORE_MEMORY flag. And the svn is only up to D2.028 (IIRC). If you
need something more recent, I have a branch that works with D2.031 (but
probably not with versions pre 2.029)
Also doesn't work wi
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:45:03 -0400, Trass3r wrote:
Robert Jacques schrieb:
If you're using a recent version of D2, you might have forgotten the
USE_CORE_MEMORY flag. And the svn is only up to D2.028 (IIRC). If you
need something more recent, I have a branch that works with D2.031 (but
pro
Kagamin wrote:
DiP2 is here. Check it.
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DiPs
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DiP2
Great start!
Andrei
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
I think what Jerome is getting at is that we could be getting more
mileage out of the xpr1..xpr2 syntax. It would be useful syntax for
more than just integral, dense ranges in foreach and slices. The
eq
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:48:45 -0400, Sean Kelly
wrote:
Even run isn't supposed to be overridable, as it's a private method.
This
works only because of a compiler bug.
whoa! I didn't realize that! Why would you ever inherit from Thread
(even as the doc says, call super(&run) in the con
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:36:05 -0400, Bartosz Milewski
wrote:
Sean Kelly Wrote:
It would be trivial to implement spawn on top of the Thread object.
Not so trivial, as I would like the spawn function to be a variadic
template.
How is that not trivial? Or at least less trivial than imple
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:47:44 -0400, Jarrett Billingsley
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 2:38 AM, Daniel Keep
wrote:
You'd have to be mad to use it like that.
struct S
{
int a;
private { size_t size; char[0] data; }
char[] message() { return data.ptr[0..length]; }
...
You can
Ah thanks, I checked the snapshot version and it works with latest D1
dmd for me.
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:46:50 -0400, Kagamin wrote:
DiP2 is here. Check it.
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DiPs
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DiP2
ps code markup is not very nice.
Thanks for that!
I updated the DiP to identify one other important problem that the
solution
Hey Robert, so how do I get all methods of a type? This doesn't work in D1.
Now suppose that get() is somewhere in a library that isn't aware of object
Person and of a template. Because that is the problem with libraries and
especially DLL's. It needs to be more dynamic. Theoretically, it shou
Bill Baxter wrote:
Not every one of those has every feature you could imagine. But nice
things about Python's slices include:
* optional step size,
* step size can be negative.
* nice compact notation
* And the a:b syntax maps to a slice object so that you can manipulate
them and pass them aroun
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
This also reminds me that the entire operator overloading
feature must be thrown away and redesigned.
:-(
that's a great choice for DIP 2. it addresses the really old "return const"
issue. We know Walter at one time wanted to solve the issue and we have an
official record of Andrei saying it's technically sound.
The sample usage should probably include temporary variables inside a function.
What
Walter Bright wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
This also reminds me that the entire operator overloading feature must
be thrown away and redesigned.
:-(
It's run its course like an old BMW. We need to do new things, and
bolting them on what we have won't work.
Andrei
Walter Bright wrote:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Walter Bright" wrote in message
It's handy when you want to prefix one expression to another, as in:
(foo(), x + 3)
I guess I'm not familiar with that syntax. What does that do and for
what purpose?
They're called Comma Expressions, and th
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
So, the correct way to define an inclusive range is with "+1" except
when it's with "nextUp", unless you're talking about the right end of the
range where it is inclusive by default and the
Walter Bright:
> Having such a third operand, however, should mesh quite well with
> Andrei's range library construct.
In normal usage slices are sometimes useful, but slicing is mostly useful when
you work with rectangular matrices, so you can slice and dice them in many
ways, across axes, etc
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
So, the correct way to define an inclusive range is with "+1"
except when it's with "nextUp", unless you're talking about the right
end of the range where it is inclusive by default and the right way to
make it exclusive is with "+1" excep
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> Would something like this work?
>
> (&data)[0..length]
Nope; &data is a char[0]*, and slicing it will get you a char[0][].
Which is pretty useless :D
If you need
> something more recent, I have a branch that works with D2.031 (but
> probably not with versions pre 2.029)
I' m sorry to step in ,but can I ask for a copy?
Thanks and best regards,
Sam
Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Walter Bright" wrote in message
It's handy when you want to prefix one expression to another, as in:
(foo(), x + 3)
I guess I'm not familiar with that syntax. What does that do and for
what purpose?
They're called
Hello Walter,
It's handy for things like rewriting ++e so it can be used more than
once but is only evaluated once:
(tmp = ++e, tmp)
Uh? How is that different from "++e"
You can then use tmp more than once with only one increment of e.
how does that differ from using ++e the first time
BCS wrote:
Hello Walter,
It's handy for things like rewriting ++e so it can be used more than
once but is only evaluated once:
(tmp = ++e, tmp)
Uh? How is that different from "++e"
You can then use tmp more than once with only one increment of e.
how does that differ from using ++e the
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
>>
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>
>>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Walter Bright" wrote in message
>
> It's handy when you want to prefix one expression to another, as in:
>
> (foo(), x + 3)
>>>
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:47:28 -0400, Sam Hu wrote:
If you need
something more recent, I have a branch that works with D2.031 (but
probably not with versions pre 2.029)
I' m sorry to step in ,but can I ask for a copy?
Thanks and best regards,
Sam
Sure. I've ziped up my dfl directory:
https
Bill Baxter wrote:
If it's internal to the parse tree can't you make the syntax whatever you want?
Something like (expr1 __exprSequencer expr2) should do just fine, right?
No reason it has to be a precious one-character symbol syntax.
What if you're writing a program that generates D code?
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Walter
Bright wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> If it's internal to the parse tree can't you make the syntax whatever you
>> want?
>> Something like (expr1 __exprSequencer expr2) should do just fine, right?
>> No reason it has to be a precious one-character symbol
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Walter
Bright wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
If it's internal to the parse tree can't you make the syntax whatever you
want?
Something like (expr1 __exprSequencer expr2) should do just fine, right?
No reason it has to be a precious one-cha
grauzone Wrote:
> The problem is, that you have to litter your code with calls like above.
Exactly. Even though it can just be brought down to one additional statement
per class, the statement in itself doesn't create any functionality, at least,
from programmers perspective.
This could obvio
48 matches
Mail list logo
