On 04/02/2011 21:07, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 15:44:46 -0500, Jeff Nowakowski
wrote:
On 02/03/2011 10:07 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
The way to get a high performance string parser in D is to take
advantage of one of D's unique features - slices. Java, C++, C#, etc.,
all
Bruno Medeiros Wrote:
> On 09/02/2011 23:02, Ulrik Mikaelsson wrote:
> > 2011/2/9 Bruno Medeiros:
> >>
> >> It's unlikely you will see converted repositories with a lot of changing
> >> blob data. DVCS, at the least in the way they work currently, simply kill
> >> this workflow/organization-patter
On 30/01/2011 08:03, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I've had some style updates from David Gileadi rotting in a zip file in
my inbox for a good while. It took me the better part of today to
manually merge his stale files with the ones in the repository, which
have in the meantime undergone many chang
On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 10:37:46 -0500, Robert Jacques wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 07:40:30 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 17:36:50 -0500, Tomek Sowiński wrote:
>>
>>> Steven Schveighoffer napisał:
>>>
Here is how I would approach it (without doing any research)
On 09/02/2011 14:27, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2011-02-09 07:49:31 -0500, Bruno Medeiros
said:
On 04/02/2011 20:11, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2011-02-04 11:12:12 -0500, Bruno Medeiros
said:
Can Git really have an usable but incomplete local clone?
Yes, it's called a shallow clone. See the --
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
>
> I don't find the name "iota" stupid.
>
> Andrei
Of course _you_ don't. However practically all the users _do_ find it poorly
named, including other developers in the project..
This is the umpteenth time this comes up in the NG and incidentally this is the
only
On 09/02/2011 23:02, Ulrik Mikaelsson wrote:
2011/2/9 Bruno Medeiros:
It's unlikely you will see converted repositories with a lot of changing
blob data. DVCS, at the least in the way they work currently, simply kill
this workflow/organization-pattern.
I very much suspect this issue will become
spir:
> People possibly interested in the question of inlining (or more generally
> factors of (in)efficiency) must start somehow, granted. But making it even
> more
> difficult than necessary, while we all know it is inherently a very complex
> topic, does not bring much, don't you think?
> I
On 02/11/2011 07:53 AM, so wrote:
While in isolation that's a good idea, how far should it be taken? Should the
compiler emit information on which variables wound up in which registers, and
why? What about other of the myriad of compiler optimizations?
Isn't Inlining by far the most important (
On 02/11/2011 07:32 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
spir wrote:
Thus, at best, we would need to know a bit about criteria used by the
compiler for deciding whether to inline or not; provided a doc explaining
this is at all readable by people who do not have the compiler-writer gene.
Aside that, let us
But I'm sure this sort of thing is also highly variable based on type of
applications, code style, language, etc.
Indeed it is, for example you won't hear much complaints from game
developers because they rely on GPU for most of the computations these
days,
but there are other areas where c
On Friday 11 February 2011 02:43:11 spir wrote:
> On 02/11/2011 07:13 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> >>> We _must_ have it there, so anyone overriding those functions _must_
> >>>
> >>> > > use it for those functions. They could create non-const versions
> >>> > > in addition to
> >>> > > the
On 02/11/2011 02:38 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Max Samukha" wrote in message
news:ij10n7$25p0$1...@digitalmars.com...
On 02/10/2011 05:18 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 2/10/11 12:30 AM, Olivier Pisano wrote:
Le 09/02/2011 21:08, Ary Manzana a écrit :
On 2/9/11 3:54 PM, bearophile wrote:
On 02/11/2011 03:06 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I feel pretty much the same way. iota seems like a horrible name as far as
figuring out what the function does from its name goes. I don't know what a good
name would be though (genSequence?)
why not "interval"? (not obvious enough ;-)
denis
--
_
Walter:
> While in isolation that's a good idea, how far should it be taken? Should the
> compiler emit information on which variables wound up in which registers, and
> why? What about other of the myriad of compiler optimizations?
Inlining is an important optimization, so give this informatio
On 02/11/2011 08:39 AM, Jim wrote:
Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
On 2011-02-10 20:15, Walter Bright wrote:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"bearophile" wrote in message
news:iivb5n$na3$1...@digitalmars.com...
auto x;
if (localtime().hours>= 8) {
x = "awake!"
} else {
x = "asleep, go away."
}
log "I'm " + x;
On 02/11/2011 09:33 AM, Jim wrote:
Regardless, I would _hope_ that the compiler would be smart enough to make
> intelligent choices about inlining. That's probably one of those areas that
can
> always be improved however.
I also think that this decision should be left to the compiler.
The i
On 02/11/2011 07:13 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
We _must_ have it there, so anyone overriding those functions _must_
> > use it for those functions. They could create non-const versions in
> > addition to
> > the const ones,
>
> It is the whole point, they can't.
Hmm. You're right (I jus
Wrappers and frequent matrix, vector operations are -a- very serious
examples that inlining is must. Now, it doesn't matter how easy or hard,
-have- +how+ could we get around this?
This is a great +excuse+ for an annotation.
duh... how hard to synchronize brain, hands and eyes...
No, not even close. The first step is figure out where your program is
slow, and then why it is slow. For example, if it is slow because foo()
is being called 1,000,000 times, you'll get a one thousand times speedup
if you can tweak your algorithms so that it is only called 1,000 times.
I t
On 2/11/2011 12:37 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
> so wrote:
>>> While in isolation that's a good idea, how far should it be taken? Should
>>> the compiler emit information on which
>>> variables wound up in which registers, and why? What about other of the
>>> myriad of compiler optimizations?
>>
>>
Jim Wrote:
> Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
>
> > On 2011-02-10 20:15, Walter Bright wrote:
> > > Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > >> "bearophile" wrote in message
> > >> news:iivb5n$na3$1...@digitalmars.com...
> > >>> auto x;
> > >>> if (localtime().hours >= 8) {
> > >>> x = "awake!"
> > >>> } else {
> > >>>
On 2011-02-11 08:39, Jim wrote:
Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
On 2011-02-10 20:15, Walter Bright wrote:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"bearophile" wrote in message
news:iivb5n$na3$1...@digitalmars.com...
auto x;
if (localtime().hours>= 8) {
x = "awake!"
} else {
x = "asleep, go away."
}
log "I'm " + x;
On 2011-02-10 23:05, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 2/10/11 9:47 AM, spir wrote:
Even then, noone forces D2 to blindly reproduce stupid naming from
APL/C++, I guess. Or what?
I don't find the name "iota" stupid.
Andrei
Of course you don't think it's stupid, you named it. It starts to look
m
On 2011-02-11 04:15, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Andrej Mitrovic" wrote in message
news:mailman.1476.1297391467.4748.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
What the hell does "to!" have to do with anything. Disregard my last
post, it's obviously 3 AM and I'm talking gibberish.
I just meant that "iota" l
so wrote:
While in isolation that's a good idea, how far should it be taken?
Should the compiler emit information on which variables wound up in
which registers, and why? What about other of the myriad of compiler
optimizations?
Isn't Inlining by far the most important (most practical) optimi
Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Regardless, I would _hope_ that the compiler would be smart enough to make
intelligent choices about inlining. That's probably one of those areas that can
always be improved however.
I agree completely. All compilers could use better register allocation
algorithms, too
Jonathan M Davis Wrote:
> On Thursday 10 February 2011 22:35:34 Walter Bright wrote:
> > Stewart Gordon wrote:
> > > On 09/02/2011 12:14, spir wrote:
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> Walter states that inline annotations are useless, since programmers
> > >> cannot generally know
> > >> which function
so wrote:
You cannot force inlining in C(++) either. The inline keyword is only
a suggestion.
I'm not understanding your last comment that a .lib would be required.
That's not correct, as since you're supplying the full source anyway
(needed for inlining), just compile in that source from the
101 - 129 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
