Sergey Gromov wrote:
Actually, I'm slowly working on a D linker myself. Writing it in D,
from scratch. My goal is to allow linking a mix of OMF and COFF objects
and libraries into the same executable, obviating the need for any
conversion. I wonder if it's feasible to continue my work. I'm
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:02:59 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Sergey Gromov wrote:
Actually, I'm slowly working on a D linker myself. Writing it in D,
from scratch. My goal is to allow linking a mix of OMF and COFF objects
and libraries into the same executable, obviating the need for any
Sergey Gromov wrote:
Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:39:13 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Optlink is written entirely in rather impenetrable assembler code, and
is resistant to understanding and modification. Hence, over the last few
months I've been very slowly converting it to C, function by function.
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:22:26 +1300, Tim Matthews wrote:
In my opinion there should be one set of libraries (not limited to 2
layers) that is generalized enough to be used by any compiler, ide or
other tools for d too.
Not too long ago I noticed yet another I've made a d ide post. The
problem
Tim Matthews:
In my opinion there should be one set of libraries (not limited to 2
layers) that is generalized enough to be used by any compiler, ide or
other tools for d too.
I know, Clang design is probably better. But it's a very different design. What
I am asking is an improvement of
I have been dabbling with the shared and immutable keywords in an effort
to find out if they are usable, and aren't getting anywhere. My current
code base avoids them like the plague, but I can see the advantages of
them if only they were usable.
The previous newsgroup threads on this issue
Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:27:59 +0300, Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:03:59 +0300, bearophile bearophileh...@lycos.com
wrote:
This looks a lot like D:
http://research.swtch.com/2009/11/go-data-structures.html
Looks like go has arrays that support slices. Do they support
Sergey Gromov:
var slice []int = array[5:7];
Is []int better than int[] ?
[5:7] is a slice syntax a bit better than [5..7] (and it's used in Python). But
in D [5:7] is the literal for an AA...
Bye,
bearophile
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:58:23 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Sergey Gromov:
var slice []int = array[5:7];
Is []int better than int[] ?
[5:7] is a slice syntax a bit better than [5..7] (and it's used in
Python). But in D [5:7] is the literal for an AA...
You could change to syntax for AAs to
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:58:23 -0500, bearophile wrote:
Sergey Gromov:
var slice []int = array[5:7];
Is []int better than int[] ?
Well, try to read aloud int[5][10]. I come up with Integer, five of
them, ten times. While [10][5]int is Array of ten arrays of
integers. It's *much* clearer.
Walter Bright Wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
As long as the spec says changing length may expand the array to hold
enough space, the optimizer can't, because the optimization would
change the side effects of the function. An optimizer should not
change the outcome or side effects of
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
Bartosz Milewski wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
How about creating a struct Value!T that transforms T (be it an
array or a class) into a value type? Then if you use Value!(int[]),
you're effectively dealing with values throughout (even though
internally
Steve, I don't know about you, but this exchange clarified some things for me.
The major one is that it's dangerous to define the semantics of a language
construct in terms of implementation. You were defending some points using
implementation arguments rather than sticking to defined
It seems that pure and nothrow are attributes, just like @safe.
(By contrast, you can overload functions based on const and immutable).
Should the names be changed?
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 03:18:05 +0300, Don nos...@nospam.com wrote:
It seems that pure and nothrow are attributes, just like @safe.
(By contrast, you can overload functions based on const and immutable).
Should the names be changed?
I agree. I also believe there should be @naked (it's somewhat
Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 03:18:05 +0300, Don nos...@nospam.com wrote:
It seems that pure and nothrow are attributes, just like @safe.
(By contrast, you can overload functions based on const and immutable).
Should the names be changed?
I agree. I also believe there should be
Bartosz Milewski wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
Bartosz Milewski wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
How about creating a struct Value!T that transforms T (be it an
array or a class) into a value type? Then if you use Value!(int[]),
you're effectively dealing with values throughout (even
== Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article
It seems that pure and nothrow are attributes, just like @safe.
(By contrast, you can overload functions based on const and immutable).
Should the names be changed?
Vote++. Now that we have attributes, I think this is a no brainer from a
SORRY
I know, this is completely OT..
However: I could use some help in jump start a VS C# project.
MS SQLServer/PostgreSQL and Infragistics know how is necessary)
Björn (nanali at wanadoo fr)
paid of course
It looks like 100% politics NOW, to me. It is for historic purpose only. I
think people have better things to do. I could be wrong. It would be a
first, but hey, people play lotto too. You're tired. You're old. You wanna
retire. The world wants you to! Oh, wait, you want to condemn the world to
Or become a Branch Davidian? Hello.
If it's them or you, it's you.
Greetings!
Below program is purpose to execute a program(exe) from registry upon system
startup.It was built successfuly,but unfortunately it does not work as
expected,nothing would happen.It prints:
Oh..no,not a good doctor.
when the program runs.
What's problem?It is under DMD2.036 under
Michael Mittner wrote:
Hi!
I'm trying to do something like this (in D1):
class Foo
{
// ...
}
class Bar(T) : Foo
{
// ...
}
alias Bar!(int) IntBar;
alias Bar!(Mars) MarsBar;
void main()
{
Foo x = new MarsBar();
}
Common base class, one derived template class and a bunch of
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3553
Summary: ICE when a template function size_t argument defaults
to __LINE__
Product: D
Version: 2.036
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Windows
Status: NEW
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3553
Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au
26 matches
Mail list logo
