On 11/18/2010 03:52 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
I'm announcing the release of DDT (D Development Tools) version 0.4.0:
http://code.google.com/a/eclipselabs.org/p/ddt/
(There was previously an older inactive project also called DDT, it has
been renamed to EclipseD, with the authors permission.)
by the way DDT for me is
http://www.allinea.com/?page=48
i.e. a distributed debugger
On 20-nov-10, at 17:54, Jordi wrote:
On 11/18/2010 03:52 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
I'm announcing the release of DDT (D Development Tools) version
0.4.0:
Very nice!
Although I would really like Issue #17 to be fixed.
So that you can write ANSI style code.
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Fawzi Mohamed fa...@gmx.ch wrote:
by the way DDT for me is
http://www.allinea.com/?page=48
i.e. a distributed debugger
On 20-nov-10, at 17:54, Jordi
Thank you so much for your work. It's really awesome to see advancement
for the D eclipse plugins.
TDPL has an example that can be reduced as follows:
void main() {
uint[string] map;
foreach (line; stdin.byLine()) {
++map[line];
}
}
byLine reuses its buffer so it exposes it as char[]. Therefore,
attempting to use map[line] will fail. The program compiled and did the
wrong thing
Am 20.11.2010 00:56, schrieb Michael Stover:
so that was 4 months ago - how do things currently stand on that initiative?
-Mike
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Bruno Medeiros
brunodomedeiros+s...@com.gmail wrote:
On 19/11/2010 22:25, Michael Stover wrote:
As for D lexers and
On 19-nov-10, at 23:44, Sean Kelly wrote:
Leandro Lucarella Wrote:
Sean Kelly, el 19 de noviembre a las 14:59 me escribiste:
This should work:
void func(string x = __FILE__, T...)(T args);
D allows defaulted template arguments to occur before non-
defaulted ones.
I wasn't aware that
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
TDPL has an example that can be reduced as follows:
void main() {
uint[string] map;
foreach (line; stdin.byLine()) {
++map[line];
}
}
byLine reuses its buffer so it exposes it as char[]. Therefore,
attempting to use map[line] will fail. The
On 20-nov-10, at 09:07, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
TDPL has an example that can be reduced as follows:
void main() {
uint[string] map;
foreach (line; stdin.byLine()) {
++map[line];
}
}
byLine reuses its buffer so it exposes it as char[]. Therefore,
attempting to use map[line] will
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:04:51 -0700
Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com wrote:
On 11/19/2010 16:40, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 11/19/10 12:59 PM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
Sorry, what I mean is: so we agree that char[] and wchar[] are special.
Unlike *all other arrays*, there are restrictions
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 00:07:57 -0800
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
TDPL has an example that can be reduced as follows:
void main() {
uint[string] map;
foreach (line; stdin.byLine()) {
++map[line];
}
}
byLine reuses its buffer so it exposes it as
On 2010-11-20 03:07:57 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
TDPL has an example that can be reduced as follows:
void main() {
uint[string] map;
foreach (line; stdin.byLine()) {
++map[line];
}
}
byLine reuses its buffer so it exposes it as char[].
D does not support logical const due to the weak guarantees that it
provides.
So, without logical const, how are D users supposed to provide lazy
evaluation and memoization in their interfaces, given that the interface
should *seem* const, e.g.
class Matrix
{
double getDeterminant() const
Dnia 20-11-2010 o 13:33:29 spir denis.s...@gmail.com napisał(a):
I find this proposal really necessary. But aren't there two issues here?
* Comparison (for lookup) by value equality should not care about
qualifiers (ie compare raw content, here plain array memory areas).
* Assignment should
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org napisał(a):
TDPL has an example that can be reduced as follows:
void main() {
uint[string] map;
foreach (line; stdin.byLine()) {
++map[line];
}
}
byLine reuses its buffer so it exposes it as char[]. Therefore,
attempting to use
On 2010-11-19 19:16, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Updated code: http://is.gd/hqPb2
Okay. As mentioned before, I have helper unit test functions which I use heavily
in std.datetime and which are pretty much going to have to either end up as
private helper functions in std.datetime or actually get
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 15:22:37 +0100
Tomek Sowiński j...@ask.me wrote:
I find this proposal really necessary. But aren't there two issues here?
* Comparison (for lookup) by value equality should not care about
qualifiers (ie compare raw content, here plain array memory areas).
*
I can't reproduce it on Windows 7 with dmd 2.050.
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Tyro[a.c.edwards] nos...@home.com wrote:
The following:
import std.regex;
void main()
{
string s = $,;
replace(s, regex($,,), ); // Is this possible? If so, what is
the propper way to do
spir wrote:
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 15:22:37 +0100
Tomek Sowiński j...@ask.me wrote:
I find this proposal really necessary. But aren't there two issues
here? * Comparison (for lookup) by value equality should not care about
qualifiers (ie compare raw content, here plain array memory areas).
On 11/20/2010 05:09 PM, spir wrote:
???
backdoor and s do not denote the same element. One is a mutable array, the other is
immutable. Why should changing backdoor affect s? Whether backdoor and chars denote the
same array depends on whether = copies or not dyn arrays. But from immutable
On 2010-11-20 09:21:04 -0500, Peter Alexander
peter.alexander...@gmail.com said:
D does not support logical const due to the weak guarantees that it provides.
So, without logical const, how are D users supposed to provide lazy
evaluation and memoization in their interfaces, given that the
I'm not particularly fond of this interface and think that a solution with a
delegate / lazy or alias template parameter would be more convenient.
However, until we have ast macros I do see the added value in this approach.
Some remarks about the api, not a proper review of the code itself:
-
What about debug vs release compilation for this new module?
We know we have assert for debug mode, and enforce for release mode
(except the special assert false case). If I want assertExcThrown to
be compiled in release mode it seems I'd need an enforced version of
it, possibly called
On 11/20/2010 05:12, spir wrote:
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:04:51 -0700 Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com
wrote:
You don't see the advantage of generic types behaving in a generic
manner? Do you know how much pain std::vectorbool caused in
C++?
I asked this before, but I received no answer.
Dnia 20-11-2010 o 17:09:00 spir denis.s...@gmail.com napisał(a):
It's busting the whole const system to smithereens.
char[] chars = abc;
char[] backdoor = chars;
string s = chars;
assert (s == abc);
backdoor.front = 'k';
assert (s == abc); // fails. not so immutable, huh?
???
backdoor and s
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 21:21:58 +0100
Tomek Sowiński j...@ask.me wrote:
Dnia 20-11-2010 o 17:09:00 spir denis.s...@gmail.com napisał(a):
It's busting the whole const system to smithereens.
char[] chars = abc;
char[] backdoor = chars;
string s = chars;
assert (s == abc);
See attachment. It's just a thought. Anyone want this in the language?
---
string sval=ab128#d;
int ival=274;
static assert(asdf \{sval} astt35 \{ival} zzf \{uuu} g,d ==
asdf ab128#d astt35 274 zzf uuu g,d); //(uuu not found)
---
php.d
Description: Binary data
Kagamin Wrote:
See attachment. It's just a thought. Anyone want this in the language?
---
string sval=ab128#d;
int ival=274;
static assert(asdf \{sval} astt35 \{ival} zzf \{uuu} g,d ==
asdf ab128#d astt35 274 zzf uuu g,d); //(uuu not found)
---
Wrote some unittests today and thought, this
On 11/21/2010 1:13 AM, Jimmy Cao wrote:
I can't reproduce it on Windows 7 with dmd 2.050.
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Tyro[a.c.edwards] nos...@home.com
mailto:nos...@home.com wrote:
The following:
import std.regex;
void main()
{
string s = $,;
Kagamin Wrote:
Wrote some unittests today and thought, this feature is useful when one wants
easy sql statements (in, e.g. unittests).
Meh, I find the placeholders to be much better (safer too):
db.query(select id from objects where type = ?, typeName);
I generally feel the same way about all
On 11/20/2010 11:22 PM, Tomek Sowiński wrote:
Dnia 20-11-2010 o 13:33:29 spir denis.s...@gmail.com napisał(a):
I find this proposal really necessary. But aren't there two issues here?
* Comparison (for lookup) by value equality should not care about
qualifiers (ie compare raw content, here
Adam D. Ruppe Wrote:
Meh, I find the placeholders to be much better (safer too):
db.query(select id from objects where type = ?, typeName);
I use it too, but found it hard to maintain/check ordering and meaning of
parameters when you edit the query, add or remove parameters.
On 11/20/2010 9:39 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2010-11-20 03:07:57 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
TDPL has an example that can be reduced as follows:
void main() {
uint[string] map;
foreach (line; stdin.byLine()) {
++map[line];
}
}
byLine reuses its buffer so
Adam D. Ruppe Wrote:
Meh, I find the placeholders to be much better (safer too):
db.query(select id from objects where type = ?, typeName);
It's also non-trivial to implement such functionality, since MS (and Oracle,
afaik) require named parameters.
On 11/20/10 12:32 PM, Rainer Deyke wrote:
On 11/20/2010 05:12, spir wrote:
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:04:51 -0700 Rainer Deykerain...@eldwood.com
wrote:
You don't see the advantage of generic types behaving in a generic
manner? Do you know how much pain std::vectorbool caused in
C++?
I asked
On Saturday 20 November 2010 08:03:52 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Why don't you use delegates instead of string mixins? For example,
assertExcThrown, could take a delegate which calls the function you want
to test instead of a string that represents the call. The mixin want be
needed as well. Am I
Tyro[a.c.edwards] nos...@home.com napisał(a):
What would be the harm if upon seeing your code the compiler did this:
char[] chars = abc.dup;
char[] backdoor = chars;
string s = chars.idup;
assert (s == abc);
backdoor.front = 'k'; // [1]
assert (s == abc);
Slightly magical but works
On Saturday 20 November 2010 10:16:55 Lutger Blijdestijn wrote:
I'm not particularly fond of this interface and think that a solution with
a delegate / lazy or alias template parameter would be more convenient.
However, until we have ast macros I do see the added value in this
approach.
On Saturday 20 November 2010 10:23:36 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
What about debug vs release compilation for this new module?
We know we have assert for debug mode, and enforce for release mode
(except the special assert false case). If I want assertExcThrown to
be compiled in release mode it
On 11/21/2010 9:23 AM, Tomek Sowiński wrote:
Tyro[a.c.edwards] nos...@home.com napisał(a):
What would be the harm if upon seeing your code the compiler did this:
char[] chars = abc.dup;
char[] backdoor = chars;
string s = chars.idup;
assert (s == abc);
backdoor.front = 'k'; // [1]
assert (s ==
On Saturday 20 November 2010 16:23:32 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
The lazy solution sounds pretty good actually. Can anyone think of any real
downsides to that? So, it would look something like
assertExcThrown(E : Throwable, T)(lazy T, string file = __FILE__, size_t
line = __LINE__);
Wait. No.
Dnia 21-11-2010 o 02:02:35 Tyro[a.c.edwards] nos...@home.com napisał(a):
The harm is confusion. Now = on arrays always means aliasing, but with
your proposal, it may *sometimes* mean dupping. Imagine real-life code
with type aliasing and type inference in play, and trying to determine
whether
On 11/21/2010 10:39 AM, Tomek Sowiński wrote:
Dnia 21-11-2010 o 02:02:35 Tyro[a.c.edwards] nos...@home.com napisał(a):
The harm is confusion. Now = on arrays always means aliasing, but with
your proposal, it may *sometimes* mean dupping. Imagine real-life code
with type aliasing and type
On 11/21/2010 02:43 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2010-11-20 09:21:04 -0500, Peter Alexander
peter.alexander...@gmail.com said:
D does not support logical const due to the weak guarantees that it
provides.
So, without logical const, how are D users supposed to provide lazy
evaluation and
On 11/20/2010 16:58, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 11/20/10 12:32 PM, Rainer Deyke wrote:
std::vectorbool in C++ is a specialization of std::vector that packs
eight booleans into a byte instead of storing each element separately.
It doesn't behave exactly like other std::vectors and
On 2010-11-20 18:04:29 -0500, Tyro[a.c.edwards] nos...@home.com said:
On 11/20/2010 9:39 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:
But didn't you agree with me yesterday in another thread that it's best
to make the caller responsible for the idup in cases where you need a
string to be immutable? Now you want
Hi all,
as it seems, the current version of BigInt is not capable of const, i.e.
BigInt(1) + const(BigInt)(1) does not work.
Is there already an effort to fix this or would it make sense if I had
taken some time to create a fix for it? I have no idea of all the asm in
the x86 specialization but
Since last month the new field of ultra high reliability is teached at a
university in germany:
http://www.presse.uni-
wuerzburg.de/einblick_archiv/archiv2010/einblick1037/montenegro0/
-manfred
Manfred_Nowak wrote:
Since last month the new field of ultra high reliability is teached at a
university in germany:
http://www.presse.uni-
wuerzburg.de/einblick_archiv/archiv2010/einblick1037/montenegro0/
-manfred
It's about time. The techniques are well-known, but since they are not taught
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4854
--- Comment #11 from Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com 2010-11-20 03:14:21 PST ---
Created an attachment (id=823)
Patch
I'm adding my patch here as well so it doesn't get lost.
I've created a patch but I'm not completely sure if it solves the
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5245
Summary: Interface function TraceInfo.toString is not
implemented
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5245
Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ibuc...@ubuntu.com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5246
--- Comment #1 from simon s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com 2010-11-20 09:05:10 PST
---
Created an attachment (id=824)
PATCH: fix use of uninitialised variable in cod4.c
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5246
--- Comment #2 from simon s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com 2010-11-20 09:05:44 PST
---
Created an attachment (id=825)
PATCH: fix use of uninitialised variable in cgelem.c
--
Configure issuemail:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5219
--- Comment #7 from Sobirari Muhomori dfj1es...@sneakemail.com 2010-11-20
14:24:31 PST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
This is not only performance but also behavior.
Multithreading, GC and TLS have global consequences, who knows, how
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2095
--- Comment #23 from Sobirari Muhomori dfj1es...@sneakemail.com 2010-11-20
14:30:34 PST ---
? extends A[]
Interesting. This type implies array is mutable, so you can put objects into
it. Java will check at runtime for array type, but in D
56 matches
Mail list logo
