Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Jeremie Pelletier
wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
303 pages and counting!
Andrei
Soon the PI level, or at least 10 times PI!
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:04:33 +0300, Chris Nicholson-Sauls
wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Jeremie Pelletier
wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
303 pag
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:37 AM, Denis Koroskin <2kor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:04:33 +0300, Chris Nicholson-Sauls
> wrote:
>
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>
>>> Bill Baxter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
>
> Bill B
Yigal Chripun wrote:
On 26/10/2009 12:07, Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
Yigal Chripun wrote:
personally I'd like to see D enums replaced by Java style enums which
make more sense to me. D enums are even worse than C enums since you
can write:
enum foo = "text";
which to me looks very similar to:
Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[snip]
Well, I guess. In particular, to me it's not clear what type we should
assign to a concatenation between a string and a wstring. With ~=,
it's much easier...
My intuition would be to expect the same as adding an int to a byte:
Lars T. Kyllingstad Wrote:
>
> I was going to protest: "But what about const struct members? Should the
> size of the following struct depend on whether the compiler determines
> it can optimize by turning its const member into a manifest constant?"
>
>struct Foo { const int bar = 123; }
>
Chris Nicholson-Sauls Wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> > Bill Baxter wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
> >> wrote:
> >>> Bill Baxter wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Jeremie Pelletier
> wrote:
> > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >> 303
On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
My current thought is to ascribe lhs ~ rhs the same type as lhs
(thereby making ~ consistent with ~= by making lhs ~= rhs same as lhs =
lhs ~ rhs) in case lhs is a string type. If lhs is a character type,
the result type is obviously th
Yigal Chripun wrote:
Lars T. Kyllingstad Wrote:
I was going to protest: "But what about const struct members? Should the
size of the following struct depend on whether the compiler determines
it can optimize by turning its const member into a manifest constant?"
struct Foo { const int bar
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Michel Fortin
wrote:
> On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
> said:
>
>> My current thought is to ascribe lhs ~ rhs the same type as lhs (thereby
>> making ~ consistent with ~= by making lhs ~= rhs same as lhs = lhs ~ rhs) in
>> case lhs is a string t
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Michel Fortin
wrote:
On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
My current thought is to ascribe lhs ~ rhs the same type as lhs (thereby
making ~ consistent with ~= by making lhs ~= rhs same as lhs = lhs ~ rhs) in
case lhs is a
Don wrote:
Nick B wrote:
Nick B wrote:
Bartosz Milewski wrote:
Nick B Wrote:
Could you give us _any_ kind of test case (even if it's enormous)?
Bartosz - are you able to provide a test case as requested by Don ?
Then it might be possible, to get this bug fixed.
Nick B.
I can send you the
Nick B wrote:
Don wrote:
Nick B wrote:
Nick B wrote:
Bartosz Milewski wrote:
Nick B Wrote:
Could you give us _any_ kind of test case (even if it's enormous)?
Bartosz - are you able to provide a test case as requested by Don ?
Then it might be possible, to get this bug fixed.
Nick B.
I ca
Don wrote:
Nick B wrote:
Don wrote:
Nick B wrote:
Nick B wrote:
Bartosz Milewski wrote:
Nick B Wrote:
Could you give us _any_ kind of test case (even if it's enormous)?
Bartosz - are you able to provide a test case as requested by Don ?
Then it might be possible, to get this bug fixed.
Ni
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Michel Fortin
wrote:
On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
My current thought is to ascribe lhs ~ rhs the same type as lhs (thereby
making ~ consistent with ~= by making lhs ~= rhs same as lhs = lhs ~ rhs) in
case lhs is a
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Pelle Månsson wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Michel Fortin
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>> said:
>>>
My current thought is to ascribe lhs ~ rhs the same type as lhs (thereby
ma
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Pelle Månsson wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Michel Fortin
wrote:
On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
My current thought is to ascribe lhs ~ rhs the same type as lhs (thereby
making ~ cons
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Pelle Månsson wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Pelle Månsson
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Michel Fortin
wrote:
>
> On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Pelle Månsson wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Pelle Månsson
wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Michel Fortin
wrote:
On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
My current
Hello Denis,
I believe templates are better be written in imperative style. That's
why a built-in "type" type is needed.
The problem there is that real template (that, at compile time, generate
a difference instance per type) are fundamentally declarative rather than
imperative. What might
Hello grauzone,
PS: I wonder, should the runtime really execute finally blocks if an
"Error" exception is thrown? (Errors are for runtime errors, Exception
for normal exceptions.) Isn't it dangerous to execute arbitrary user
code in presence of what is basically an internal error?
If a thrown
Hello Anders,
BCS wrote:
So if you want to ship headers as a form of documentation for your
library, you may want to find another way.
Yes: do it the traditional way as in C/C++.
You keep refuring to the header files as documentation but I can't
remember that last time I looked at someone
Hello Yigal,
On 22/10/2009 18:52, BCS wrote:
So, if your library has LLVM code representation, then it's easier to
get to but just as bad as reading a ASM dump from the compiler.
I'm being more than a bit sarcastic there, but keep in mind that 99%
of
the info I'm interested in isn't in the ass
BCS wrote:
Hello grauzone,
PS: I wonder, should the runtime really execute finally blocks if an
"Error" exception is thrown? (Errors are for runtime errors, Exception
for normal exceptions.) Isn't it dangerous to execute arbitrary user
code in presence of what is basically an internal error?
Don:
> 3423. My patch has already been included in the dmd svn, and Bartosz has
> a compiled DMD with the bug fixed.
You are my third hero :-)
(the first is Richard Feynman).
Bye,
bearophile
On 27/10/2009 22:50, BCS wrote:
And as soon as you *require* an IDE to view the stuff, working without
one goes from 'less than ideal' to functionally impossible. I think we
have been over this ground before; I have major issues with tool chains
that are more or less impossible to use without a
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:21:47 +0300, grauzone wrote:
BCS wrote:
Hello grauzone,
PS: I wonder, should the runtime really execute finally blocks if an
"Error" exception is thrown? (Errors are for runtime errors, Exception
for normal exceptions.) Isn't it dangerous to execute arbitrary user
code
I'm looking at the GC implementation and starting my hacking. I noticed that
the ends of blocks are already being used in some creative ways in the
sentinel version. This looks like a debugging feature, though I don't
understand it completely. Can one of the original implementors (Walter, Sean)
Bill Baxter, el 27 de octubre a las 13:12 me escribiste:
> > They are?
> >
> > ...Then what is the point of wstring, dstring?
>
> They are all just different representations of Unicode.
>
> string, which is unicode in UTF-8, is good because it's the least
> wasteful for mostly ASCII text. And ha
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Bill Baxter, el 27 de octubre a las 13:12 me escribiste:
They are?
...Then what is the point of wstring, dstring?
They are all just different representations of Unicode.
string, which is unicode in UTF-8, is good because it's the least
wasteful for mostly ASCII text.
dsimcha, el 27 de octubre a las 01:34 me escribiste:
> > > 2. Some concern has been expressed in the past about the possibility of
> > > using 4
> > > bytes per block in overhead to store pointers to bitmasks. IMHO this
> > > concern is
> > > misplaced because in any program that takes up enoug
dsimcha, el 27 de octubre a las 23:41 me escribiste:
> I'm looking at the GC implementation and starting my hacking. I noticed that
> the ends of blocks are already being used in some creative ways in the
> sentinel version. This looks like a debugging feature, though I don't
> understand it comp
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 27 de octubre a las 19:32 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >Bill Baxter, el 27 de octubre a las 13:12 me escribiste:
> >>>They are?
> >>>
> >>>...Then what is the point of wstring, dstring?
> >>They are all just different representations of Unicode.
> >>
> >>strin
grauzone, el 26 de octubre a las 08:44 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >grauzone, el 25 de octubre a las 12:09 me escribiste:
> >>Right now, you can catch every exception with "try { something; }
> >>catch { somethingelse; }".
> >>
> >>Can we get rid of this abomination before D2 is fin
I've recently updated to DMD2.035 (from DMD2.031 because all the later
versions had issues with imports) and for the first time faced problems
with shared modifier.
I don't need shared and all my globals are __gshared (they are globally
unique instances that don't need per-thread copies).
35 matches
Mail list logo
