Also the hover feature/Open Declaration sometimes behaves incorrectly.
Unfortunately I couldn't really track down its cause yet :(
Usually when hovering over a function call the ddoc output is correct.
Then holding shift to see the source suddenly shows another function. F3
also jumps to that
Ary Borenszweig schrieb:
Please report these things into the bug tracket:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/descent/newticket
I'd have done that, if I had managed to narrow down the problem.
I have a proposal. The idea isn't new and is perhaps a bit boring, but
anyway.
In the newsgroups there are many comments like: Can't just Phobos
disappear? and similar. From other side the .NET Framework has a dull
name, but everyone can tell you that this is _the_ framework for the .NET
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Daniel
Keepdaniel.keep.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, but you can't seriously claim D is still easy to implement whilst
.stringof still exists in its current form. :P
Oh, .stringof is nothing compared to the complexity added by
llee Wrote:
The std.xml module contains several bugs that need to be fixed. The most
important one is that the parser fails to parse empty elements (IE elements
that use the tag name=value / format). I'd like to report this bug to the
modules' maintainer, but I don't know who to contact.
teo wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:34:44 +, BCS wrote:
Reply to teo,
I did some tests and here are the results: D cannot be used in Shared
Objects. The only case that works is when no classes are exported and
when there are no references to Phobos within the library.
this works:
teo wrote:
I have a proposal. The idea isn't new and is perhaps a bit boring, but
anyway.
In the newsgroups there are many comments like: Can't just Phobos
disappear? and similar. From other side the .NET Framework has a dull
name, but everyone can tell you that this is _the_ framework for
Nick Sabalausky Wrote:
An alternate usage/definition syntax for properties.
http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP4
Overriding semantic should be outlined too.
Stewart Gordon wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
D has ; as the empty statement. In fact I think it's an empty
declaration because it can appear at top level.
snip
That's always been one of my peeves. At least, ever since I discovered
that preventing such common C typos as
if (...);
llee wrote:
The std.xml module contains several bugs that need to be fixed. The most important one is that
the parser fails to parse empty elements (IE elements that use the tag
name=value / format). I'd like to report this bug to the modules' maintainer,
but I don't know who to contact.
Don wrote:
Interestingly
CommaExpression doesn't seem to be defined anywhere in the D spec.
It's under the heading of 'Expression':
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/expression.html#Expression
The property keyword looks nice though. What prevents us from doing
more generic annotations with syntax like @property?
--bb
I don't know.
Also I don't know where to put this post, so I'll just reply to yours :-)
-
Maybe @Property is too general.
a) @Prop
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
Might be because (a) we aren't getting our priorities right, (b) we
ascribe more to properties than what the compiler really makes of them.
At the end of the day, a property is a notational convenience. Instead
of writing:
obj.set_xyz(5);
int a =
sclytrack Wrote:
-
Maybe @Property is too general.
b) @ToBeDisplayedInTheObjectInspectorOrPropertyEditorOfTheIDE
(b) Would only be used in GUI api's, and not
everywhere there is a setter or getter, mutator or
accessor, reader or writer.
Jarrett Billingsley:
No, *bugzilla* and *the LDC ticket tracker* are the right place to ask
for such optimizations.
LDC isn't the right place for such optimizations because:
- They are not easy, especially the first one, so Walter may be fitter for such
work;
- Such optimizations require brain
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
I know you said you didn't
really like the idea of having to name your range's empty function
'opGet_empty'.
Correct. I'd rather try to disambiguate the rather rare case when a
property returns a delegate etc. For me, I get a breath of fresh air
whenever I
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
What prevents us from doing
more generic annotations with syntax like @property?
Walter. No one's been able to convince him they're useful.
Then someone better put forward a good argument.
.Net framework is one big good argument, here are some usecases:
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote in message
news:h4lsuo$au...@digitalmars.com...
For me, I get a breath of fresh air whenever I get to not write (). I
can't figure how some are missing it.
Every time I call a parameterless function in D, I curse under my breath at
Tue, 28 Jul 2009 04:53:02 -0400, bearophile thusly wrote:
Such optimizations require brain and maybe even planning. So they have
to be discussed first.
The discussion or collective community opinion won't help a bit. Walter
is the only person who decides what goes into the spec and what
Tue, 28 Jul 2009 04:57:57 -0400, Kagamin thusly wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
I know you said you didn't
really like the idea of having to name your range's empty function
'opGet_empty'.
Correct. I'd rather try to disambiguate the rather rare case when a
property returns a
Mon, 27 Jul 2009 22:57:09 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu thusly wrote:
Correct. I'd rather try to disambiguate the rather rare case when a
property returns a delegate etc. For me, I get a breath of fresh air
whenever I get to not write (). I can't figure how some are missing
it.
You would likely
Jarrett Billingsley escribió:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Andrei
Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Rainer Deyke wrote:
Benji Smith wrote:
3) The existence of magical identifiers complicates the language
design. Because the rules that apply to those magical identifiers is
Ary Borenszweig:
And currently D has 106 keywords. I think no one will care if it has 107. :-P
So far the idea of adding the property keyword looks like a nice solution.
But adding semantic annotations (Java-style, C#-style, or something different)
to D2 may be a better solution to this
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:43 AM, Ellery
Newcomerellery-newco...@utulsa.edu wrote:
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Daniel
Keepdaniel.keep.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, but you can't seriously claim D is still easy to implement whilst
.stringof still exists in its
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Andrei
Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
The property attribute also has the nice property
(heh) that you can call the property setters and getters either as
properties or as functions (i.e. r.empty or r.empty()).
Basically, the behavior would
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:14:10 -0400, Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com
wrote:
Benji Smith wrote:
For my money, the best solution is a simple property keyword as a
function modifier. Only functions with the property modifier would be
allowed to pose as fields (getters called without parens,
Kagamin wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
What prevents us from doing
more generic annotations with syntax like @property?
Walter. No one's been able to convince him they're useful.
Then someone better put forward a good argument.
.Net framework is one big good argument, here are some
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote in message
news:h4lsuo$au...@digitalmars.com...
For me, I get a breath of fresh air whenever I get to not write (). I
can't figure how some are missing it.
Every time I call a parameterless function in D, I curse
Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
llee wrote:
The std.xml module contains several bugs that need to be fixed. The
most important one is that the parser fails to parse empty elements
(IE elements that use the tag name=value / format). I'd like to
report this bug to the modules' maintainer, but I
Kagamin wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
I know you said you didn't really like the idea of having to name
your range's empty function 'opGet_empty'.
Correct. I'd rather try to disambiguate the rather rare case when a
property returns a delegate etc. For me, I get a breath of fresh
air
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
llee wrote:
The std.xml module contains several bugs that need to be fixed. The
most important one is that the parser fails to parse empty elements
(IE elements that use the tag name=value / format). I'd like to
report this bug to the
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Andrei
Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
The property attribute also has the nice property
(heh) that you can call the property setters and getters either as
properties or as functions (i.e. r.empty or r.empty()).
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:37:01 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
The getter notation that currently exists only has a few minor
problems. The most major of those problems is if the return value is a
callable type, such as a
Kagamin wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
I know you said you didn't really like the idea of having to name
your range's empty function 'opGet_empty'.
Correct. I'd rather try to disambiguate the rather rare case when a
property returns a delegate etc. For me, I get a breath of fresh
air
Daniel Keep wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
llee wrote:
The std.xml module contains several bugs that need to be fixed. The
most important one is that the parser fails to parse empty elements
(IE elements that use the tag name=value / format). I'd like to
report
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Andrei
Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
* The syntax foo = bar is rewritten into foo(bar) IF AND ONLY IF the
expression auto __x = foo, __x = bar is compilable.
// returns number of characters written
int write(...) { ... }
write = 42; //
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:37:01 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
... with zero arguments.
No, callable types period. Note that this does not compile:
class A
{
int delegate(int foo) wyda()
{
return delegate int(int foo) { return foo;};
}
}
int
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Unfortunately I'm not seeing any.
There's a simple solution, future D2 programmers will have both libs installed,
so they will just use the Tango XML reader. So the best solution is to remove
the XML reader from Phobos. The idea is to remove most inter-library
redundancy.
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:16:16 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
I think inferring meaning from the presence or absence of () is rather
dicey.
Really? Then why name your functions things like empty, why not ex245, to
make them look it up, making *sure* they
Walter Bright, el 27 de julio a las 12:45 me escribiste:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 27 de julio a las 08:45 me escribiste:
I haven't seen Walter voice an opinion on any DIP so far. We desperately
need to get a DIP through a full cycle. Has
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:16:16 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
I think inferring meaning from the presence or absence of () is
rather dicey.
Really? Then why name your functions things like empty, why not ex245,
to make them look
On 2009-07-28 10:09:04 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
Yes, I think that will be necessary. Any volunteers? :o)
Andrei
There is already a high-performance one in Tango. There must be some
way to avoid duplicating effort.
Unfortunately I'm not seeing any.
Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2009-07-28 10:09:04 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
Yes, I think that will be necessary. Any volunteers? :o)
Andrei
There is already a high-performance one in Tango. There must be some
way to avoid duplicating effort.
Unfortunately
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:23:50PM -0300, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
But *why* use or make another one when the Tango one is already
excellent? :(
Copyright.
--
Adam D. Ruppe
http://arsdnet.net
On 2009-07-28 10:16:16 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
Well I don't think so. To repeat what I wrote elsethread: foo = bar is
rewritten into foo(bar) if and only if auto __x = foo, __x = bar works.
This means, a setter only works if there's a corresponding
Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2009-07-28 10:16:16 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
Well I don't think so. To repeat what I wrote elsethread: foo = bar is
rewritten into foo(bar) if and only if auto __x = foo, __x = bar
works. This means, a setter only works if there's
On 2009-07-28 11:38:36 -0400, Adam D. Ruppe destructiona...@gmail.com said:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:23:50PM -0300, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
But *why* use or make another one when the Tango one is already
excellent? :(
Copyright.
That, and because there's some fun in doing it. Anyway, this
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:11:09 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:16:16 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
I think inferring meaning from the presence or absence of () is
rather
Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:38:36 -0400, Adam D. Ruppe thusly wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:23:50PM -0300, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
But *why* use or make another one when the Tango one is already
excellent? :(
Copyright.
There are most likely several issues that prevent the reuse of that code.
On 2009-07-28 11:37:05 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2009-07-28 10:16:16 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
Well I don't think so. To repeat what I wrote elsethread: foo = bar is
rewritten into foo(bar) if
Rainer Deyke wrote:
For my money, the best solution is a simple property keyword as a
function modifier. Only functions with the property modifier would be
allowed to pose as fields (getters called without parens, setters called
using assignment syntax). But, in all other respects, they
language_fan wrote:
Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:38:36 -0400, Adam D. Ruppe thusly wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:23:50PM -0300, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
But *why* use or make another one when the Tango one is already
excellent? :(
Copyright.
There are most likely several issues that prevent the
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Donnos...@nospam.com wrote:
Walter once claimed that it's useful for automatically generated code.
Though I'm still not quite sure how.
Yes. He's recently the claimed the same thing about the comma operator, but
I don't buy that argument. I've never needed to
Daniel Keep Wrote:
There is already a high-performance one in Tango. There must be some
way to avoid duplicating effort.
Isn't it high-performance at the cost of not complaining to the DOM
specification?
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:11:09 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:16:16 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
I think inferring meaning from the presence or
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Donnos...@nospam.com wrote:
Walter once claimed that it's useful for automatically generated code.
Though I'm still not quite sure how.
Yes. He's recently the claimed the same thing about the comma operator, but
I don't buy that argument.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Andrei
Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Well there are quite a few other things that are arguably against C look and
feel, such as the scope statement. I've never had a problem understanding
code because of lacking (), and I never ever write
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Again, most complaints have been directed towards writeln = 5. I think
that's the major problem to be resolved.
Here's another, one that's pretty common:
class Person {
private string name_;
string name() {
return name_;
}
}
string[] split(string s,
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:30:00 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
And for years, there have been complaints about it. This will
continuously be a thorn in the side of D adoption until it is resolved.
Again, most complaints have been
Reply to Daniel,
Well of course it can't compile: YOU MOVED test.d! What do you expect
when you tell it to import a file that no longer exists? The compiler
is not psychic.
If you really, absolutely have to have the two parts in different
directories, just generate a header file.
dmd -H -c
sclytrack wrote:
- How does it interact with inheritance? Can I override properties?
sure
Can I partially override properties (setter but not getter)?
C# no.
- Can I write a setter that accepts another type?
no
- Can I write a templated setter that accepts *all* types? If so, how?
language_fan wrote:
Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:38:36 -0400, Adam D. Ruppe thusly wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:23:50PM -0300, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
But *why* use or make another one when the Tango one is already
excellent? :(
Copyright.
There are most likely several issues that prevent
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:11:09 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Guess what - they both behave like functions. So their properties are
an elaborate mechanism that is actually thoroughly unchecked, thus
going
Rainer Deyke wrote:
Benji Smith wrote:
For my money, the best solution is a simple property keyword as a
function modifier. Only functions with the property modifier would be
allowed to pose as fields (getters called without parens, setters called
using assignment syntax). But, in all other
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:11:09 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
D's implementation looks to me like a quick hack so D can say look,
we have properties! They don't provide any of the interface benefits
that
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Andrei
Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Well there are quite a few other things that are arguably against C look and
feel, such as the scope statement. I've never had a problem understanding
code because of lacking (), and I
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Donnos...@nospam.com wrote:
Walter once claimed that it's useful for automatically generated code.
Though I'm still not quite sure how.
Yes. He's recently the claimed the same thing about the comma
operator, but
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Steven
Schveighofferschvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:30:00 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
What if the compiler allowed you to call functions as long as what you
typed was an
Daniel Keep wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Donnos...@nospam.com wrote:
Walter once claimed that it's useful for automatically generated code.
Though I'm still not quite sure how.
Yes. He's recently the claimed the same thing about the
Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:11:09 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Guess what - they both behave like functions. So their properties
are an elaborate mechanism that is actually thoroughly
Kagamin s...@here.lot wrote in message
news:h4jq11$1jv...@digitalmars.com...
http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP5
As namespaces were proposed, a variant of them is in DIP5 now.
Why not just..
class Foo
{
private:
int mx;
public:
int x.opGet() { return mx; }
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:51:11 -0400, Bill Baxter wbax...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Steven
Schveighofferschvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
I want to use the parentheses or lack thereof as part of the human
meaning
for the function/property. Making them optional means I can't
Bill Baxter:
Now we may not want to go so hog wild putting @this and @that
everywhere, but if we did we could get rid of 19 keywords right there,
and add @property also without adding a new keyword.
Glad to see I'm not the only one to think like this :-)
Later more semantic attributes can be
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:34:44 +, BCS wrote:
Reply to teo,
I did some tests and here are the results: D cannot be used in Shared
Objects. The only case that works is when no classes are exported and
when there are no references to Phobos within the library.
this works:
it doesn't
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:02:31 +1000, Daniel Keep wrote:
teo wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:34:44 +, BCS wrote:
Reply to teo,
I did some tests and here are the results: D cannot be used in Shared
Objects. The only case that works is when no classes are exported and
when there are no
Daniel Keep Wrote:
U comma(T,U)(T a, U b) { return b; }
Is there any reason you couldn't use something like that?
Sorry, this is probably a newbie question, but.. So instead of return a, b, c;
you now have to write return comma(a, comma(b, c)); ? How will that help?
Ary Borenszweig Wrote:
Definitely. I think attributes/annotations is the best solution for
this. It's also the most extensible way to do it. The lexer and parser
doesn't need to change for each new attribute. Maybe just the semantic pass.
That's ingenious. No need to change the lexer and
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:12 AM, bearophilebearophileh...@lycos.com wrote:
Bill Baxter:
Now we may not want to go so hog wild putting @this and @that
everywhere, but if we did we could get rid of 19 keywords right there,
and add @property also without adding a new keyword.
Glad to see I'm
Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Arthur Lloydv...@google.com wrote:
Daniel Keep Wrote:
U comma(T,U)(T a, U b) { return b; }
Is there any reason you couldn't use something like that?
Sorry, this is probably a newbie question, but.. So instead of return a, b,
c; you now have to write return
Stewart Gordon wrote:
Don wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
snip
blah: {}
Except in an asm block. Can't think of anything else.
snip
But an asm block doesn't contain D statements, so that's another matter.
Stewart.
Yes, you're right, it's asm syntax -- though it's an asm syntax which
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:19:49 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Steven
Schveighofferschvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:30:00 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
The presence or absence of parens is a hard-coded accepted meaning of
field vs. function.
I understand how some people want to derive meaning from obj.foo()
versus obj.foo. I think they shouldn't in D. I mean D has had for years
the
Bill Baxter:
Switch is a monstrosity pretty much any way you look at it. Sh had the right
idea there. Is case really necessary there? Some syntax should
suffice I would thing. And default is probably the world's most
useless keyword. Why not else: or *: instead of introducing a
whole new
language_fan wrote:
Tue, 28 Jul 2009 04:53:02 -0400, bearophile thusly wrote:
Such optimizations require brain and maybe even planning. So they have
to be discussed first.
The discussion or collective community opinion won't help a bit. Walter
is the only person who decides what goes into
Daniel Keep wrote:
teo wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:34:44 +, BCS wrote:
Reply to teo,
I did some tests and here are the results: D cannot be used in Shared
Objects. The only case that works is when no classes are exported and
when there are no references to Phobos within the library.
Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
Or just use the -I command line argument to point to the folder in
which test.d is stored.
Jerome
PS: Just as in C/C++, really
--
mailto:jeber...@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeber...@jabber.fr
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Andrei
Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Steven
Schveighofferschvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:30:00 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven
Arthur Lloyd wrote:
Ary Borenszweig Wrote:
Definitely. I think attributes/annotations is the best solution for
this. It's also the most extensible way to do it. The lexer and parser
doesn't need to change for each new attribute. Maybe just the semantic pass.
That's ingenious. No need to
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Donnos...@nospam.com wrote:
Walter once claimed that it's useful for automatically generated code.
Though I'm still not quite sure how.
Yes. He's recently the claimed the same thing about the comma operator, but
I don't buy that argument.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:01 PM, bearophilebearophileh...@lycos.com wrote:
Bill Baxter:
Switch is a monstrosity pretty much any way you look at it. Sh had the right
idea there. Is case really necessary there? Some syntax should
suffice I would thing. And default is probably the world's
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
However, when I see:
x.empty;
I can't tell what is implied here.
You can. In either C# or D language it could execute arbitrary code that
you better know what it's supposed to do. D simply doesn't make it bad
style as C# stupidly does.
Andrei
Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
The presence or absence of parens is a hard-coded accepted meaning of
field vs. function.
I understand how some people want to derive meaning from obj.foo()
versus obj.foo. I think they shouldn't in D. I mean D
On 2009-07-28 10:08:17 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
My perception is that there are a few vocal people. The protests have
been historically against the stupid writeln = 42 which we must get
rid of.
For the record, I'm not even bothered by such things.
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:08:58 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
However, when I see:
x.empty;
I can't tell what is implied here.
You can. In either C# or D language it could execute arbitrary code that
you better know what it's
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:55:17 +0200, Lutger wrote:
Sorry for the rant, I just think phobos as is developing is superior to
the .NET framework and has a much cooler name too :) Same goes for
Tango, albeit quite different design than phobos, it's very good too and
beats .NET hands down. Also,
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:08:58 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
However, when I see:
x.empty;
I can't tell what is implied here.
You can. In either C# or D language it could execute arbitrary code
that
Could an option be added to the formatting to elide trailing zero's for %f ?
That way it is possible to create an more optimal formatting for which the
following holds:
float f;
s = format(f);
float f2 = to!(float)(s);
assert(f==f2);
The formatting I'm trying to get can be seen here (decimal):
Andrei Alexandrescu pisze:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:08:58 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
However, when I see:
x.empty;
I can't tell what is implied here.
You can. In either C# or D language it could
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:21:09 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:08:58 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
However, when I see:
x.empty;
I can't tell
aarti_pl wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu pisze:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:08:58 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
However, when I see:
x.empty;
I can't tell what is implied here.
You can. In either C# or D
1 - 100 of 197 matches
Mail list logo
