On Friday, 2 March 2012 at 12:27:06 UTC, bioinfornatics wrote:
Dear,
I have do a D 2 port to my dscience project:
https://gitorious.org/dscience/dscience
Any help are welcome
I'm willing to help but I've got a couple of other things I need
to get out the door first.
But I will take a look
quickbar-20120313-b.rar
Description: Binary data
On 3/13/2012 3:06 AM, negerns wrote:
I'm so sorry for that :( my bad! I hope it could be delete...
The extended review period for std.log has ended [1], and Jose,
the author of the proposed module, has requested some extra time
to incorporate the suggestions made during the review without
ending up with a butchered design. Thus, the review process has
been suspended as to not block the
On 12-03-2012 06:43, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 04:54:09PM -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
Consider the toHash() function for struct key types:
http://dlang.org/hash-map.html
And of course the others:
const hash_t toHash();
const bool opEquals(ref const KeyType s);
const int
On 12-03-2012 07:04, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 12-03-2012 06:43, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 04:54:09PM -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
Consider the toHash() function for struct key types:
http://dlang.org/hash-map.html
And of course the others:
const hash_t toHash();
const
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 01:36:06AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote in message
news:mailman.510.1331520028.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
[...]
Personally, I found discrete math to be the easiest class I took since
kindergarten (*Both* of the times
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 01:48:46AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote in message
news:mailman.517.1331521772.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:38:12PM +0100, deadalnix wrote:
I think a better solution is including expected
On Sunday, March 11, 2012 21:33:23 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
At any rate, the comparison is rigged because C++ is much more mature
and invested in.
It _is_ rigged, but if a programmer is used to more mature languages where
they don't run into compiler bugs, and they try out a new one where
On 03/12/2012 05:01 AM, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 21:49:52 -0500, Mantis mail.mantis...@gmail.com
wrote:
12.03.2012 4:00, Robert Jacques пишет:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:15:31 -0500, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch
wrote:
On 03/11/2012 11:58 PM, Robert Jacques wrote:
Manu was
On Sunday, 11 March 2012 at 23:54:10 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Consider the toHash() function for struct key types:
http://dlang.org/hash-map.html
And of course the others:
const hash_t toHash();
const bool opEquals(ref const KeyType s);
const int opCmp(ref const KeyType s);
They need to be,
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 07:18:06 UTC, so wrote:
A pattern is emerging. Why not analyze it a bit and somehow try
to find a common ground? Then we can generalize it to a single
annotation.
@mask(wat) const|pure|nothrow|safe
@wat hash_t toHash()
@wat bool opEquals(ref const KeyType s)
@wat
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 07:04:52 +0100, Alex Rønne Petersen
xtzgzo...@gmail.com wrote:
Or, as a compromise, perhaps the compiler can auto-infer most of the
attributes without any further effort from the user.
No, that has API design issues. You can silently break a guarantee you
made
On 12 March 2012 21:08, Martin Nowak d...@dawgfoto.de wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 07:04:52 +0100, Alex Rønne Petersen
xtzgzo...@gmail.com wrote:
Or, as a compromise, perhaps the compiler can auto-infer most of the
attributes without any further effort from the user.
No, that has API design
So I propose instead a bit of a hack. toHash, opEquals, and opCmp as
struct members be automatically annotated with pure, nothrow, and @safe
(if not already marked as @trusted).
How about complete inference instead of a hack?
On 12 March 2012 04:44, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.orgwrote:
On 3/11/12 6:30 PM, Manu wrote:
D should
define an MRV ABI which is precisely the ABI for passing multiple args
TO a function, but in reverse, for any given architecture. This also has
the lovely side effect of
On 12 March 2012 04:00, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:15:31 -0500, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote:
On 03/11/2012 11:58 PM, Robert Jacques wrote:
Manu was arguing that MRV were somehow special and had mystical
optimization potential. That's simply not
Am Mon, 12 Mar 2012 07:06:33 +0100
schrieb Alex Rønne Petersen xtzgzo...@gmail.com:
I should point out that I *do* think the idea is good (i.e. if you want
the bad things, that's what you have to declare), but it's just too
late now. Also, there might be issues with const and the likes -
On 2012-03-11 20:55, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Mobile sites have traditionally required less-fancy implementations, so it's
not unreasonable to think that some sites would use their mobile version
*as* their low-tech fallback version. That's becoming less and less true
these days, of course. But
On 3/12/2012 1:08 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
What's wrong with auto-inference. Inferred attributes are only strengthening
guarantees.
Auto-inference is currently done for lambdas and template functions - why? -
because the function's implementation is guaranteed to be visible to the
compiler.
On 2012-03-11 23:36, Chad J wrote:
No, just getting the font onto the screen at all.
And I want to:
- Be able to size the font smoothly. (No bitmap fonts!)
- Draw glyphs for higher unicode codepoints. (No texture[128]!)
- Have kerning/hinting. (Freetype makes it possible, but does not do it
12.03.2012 6:01, Robert Jacques пишет:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 21:49:52 -0500, Mantis mail.mantis...@gmail.com
wrote:
[...]
That's the point of discussion. Fields of structure may not be optimized
away, because they are not independent variables. In D you have
unchecked pointer-to-pointer casts,
One problem I can think of is relying on the auto-inference can create
fragile code. You make a change in one place without concentrating and
suddenly a completely different part of your code breaks, because it's
expecting pure, or @safe code and you have done something to prevent
the inference.
On 2012-03-12 03:16, Chad J wrote:
I remember doing colored terminal output in Python. It was pretty nifty,
and allows for some slick CLI design. I think D can do better by putting
it in the standard library.
I was thinking something along the lines of this:
That sounds intentionally.
Say you have a struct with a getHash method.
struct Key
{
hash_t getHash() /* inferred pure */
{
}
}
Say you have an Set that requires a pure opHash.
void insert(Key key) pure
{
immutable hash = key.toHash();
}
Now if you change the
On 11/03/2012 16:49, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
Hello,
I'm looking for a D grammar in (E)BNF form. Did any of you write
something like that or do you think I can use the grammar parts on
dlang.org?
I remember different threads on this subject and saw the docs being
updated regularly on github,
So, function with MRV is basically the function that returns
Tuple where one can specify return convention?
---
auto fun()
{
return(Windows) tuple(1, 2.0f);
}
(int x, float y) = fun();
---
Le 12/03/2012 00:54, Walter Bright a écrit :
Consider the toHash() function for struct key types:
http://dlang.org/hash-map.html
And of course the others:
const hash_t toHash();
const bool opEquals(ref const KeyType s);
const int opCmp(ref const KeyType s);
They need to be, as well as const,
Am Sun, 11 Mar 2012 04:12:12 -0400
schrieb Nick Sabalausky a@a.a:
I think it's a shame that companies hand out high-end hardware to their
developers like it was candy. There's no doubt in my mind that's
significantly contributed to the amount of bloatware out there.
But what if the
On 12/03/12 00:55, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 12-03-2012 00:54, Walter Bright wrote:
Consider the toHash() function for struct key types:
http://dlang.org/hash-map.html
And of course the others:
const hash_t toHash();
const bool opEquals(ref const KeyType s);
const int opCmp(ref const
I searched every inch of Opera's options screens and never
found *any* mention or reference to any Disable AutoUpdate
Derek ddparn...@bigpond.com wrote in message
news:op.wazmllu534mv3i@red-beast...
I found it in a minute. First I tried opera help and it directed me to
details about
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 01:26:54 -0400, Jose Armando Garcia
jsan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 07:09:17 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
What is wrong with
import std.log;
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 01:05:33 -0400, Jose Armando Garcia
jsan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
I thought more about the point made about mixing throwing and logging
levels. I agree that it's awkward to e.g. log to
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 14:41:53 -0500, Nick Sabalausky a@a.a wrote:
You know what I think it is (without actually looking at the code): I
think
they tried to do some highly misguided and even more poorly implemented
hack
(which they no-doubt thought was clever) for dealing with *cough* old
On 12-03-2012 10:40, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:08 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
What's wrong with auto-inference. Inferred attributes are only
strengthening
guarantees.
Auto-inference is currently done for lambdas and template functions -
why? - because the function's implementation is
On Mar 12, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 3/11/12 4:49 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
Unfortunately, the discussion has ground to a halt again, so consider
this a friendly reminder that there is still one day left until the end
of the review period.
David
I thought more
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 00:06:40 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Insert obligatory link: http://drdobbs.com/184401197
Very insightful article.
Interesting point to make about D, however. It's really *difficult* to
make related non-member non-friend functions,
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 00:18:31 -0500, Daniel Murphy
yebbl...@nospamgmail.com wrote:
Nick Sabalausky a@a.a wrote in message
news:jjh9uh$1vto$1...@digitalmars.com...
My understanding is that the *only* thing preventing vitrual template
functions is the possibility of pre-compiled closed-source
Le 12/03/2012 13:51, Alex Rønne Petersen a écrit :
On 12-03-2012 10:40, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:08 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
What's wrong with auto-inference. Inferred attributes are only
strengthening
guarantees.
Auto-inference is currently done for lambdas and template functions
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 19:54:09 -0400, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Consider the toHash() function for struct key types:
http://dlang.org/hash-map.html
And of course the others:
const hash_t toHash();
const bool opEquals(ref const KeyType s);
const int opCmp(ref const
On Sunday, 11 March 2012 at 22:39:46 UTC, Chad J wrote:
On 03/11/2012 04:24 AM, Kiith-Sa wrote:
Thanks for the link!
I don't have time to go over it right now, but that looks
promising. I took a shot at porting Tomasz's code a while ago,
but I never got it to compile. At least your code
On 12-03-2012 14:16, deadalnix wrote:
Le 12/03/2012 13:51, Alex Rønne Petersen a écrit :
On 12-03-2012 10:40, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:08 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
What's wrong with auto-inference. Inferred attributes are only
strengthening
guarantees.
Auto-inference is currently
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:40:16 +0100, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:08 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
What's wrong with auto-inference. Inferred attributes are only
strengthening
guarantees.
Auto-inference is currently done for lambdas and template functions -
Walter:
toHash, opEquals, and opCmp as struct members be automatically
annotated with pure, nothrow, and @safe (if not already marked
as @trusted).
I have read the other answers of this thread, and I don't like
some of them.
In this case I think this programmer convenience doesn't justify
I have a problem when calling D functions from C. While I can
perform simple arithmetic operations (i.e. the calculation is
performed in D and returned to C), I experience problems when
trying to perform string/char operations or call functions from
the D standard library (e.g. writefln()). The
On 12-03-2012 15:53, Chris W. wrote:
I have a problem when calling D functions from C. While I can
perform simple arithmetic operations (i.e. the calculation is
performed in D and returned to C), I experience problems when
trying to perform string/char operations or call functions from
the D
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:51:08AM +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-03-12 03:16, Chad J wrote:
I remember doing colored terminal output in Python. It was pretty
nifty, and allows for some slick CLI design. I think D can do better
by putting it in the standard library.
I was thinking
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:53:09 -0400, Chris W. wend...@cd.ie wrote:
I have a problem when calling D functions from C. While I can
perform simple arithmetic operations (i.e. the calculation is
performed in D and returned to C), I experience problems when
trying to perform string/char operations or
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 15:00:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:53:09 -0400, Chris W. wend...@cd.ie
wrote:
I have a problem when calling D functions from C. While I can
perform simple arithmetic operations (i.e. the calculation is
performed in D and returned to
On 12-03-2012 16:09, Chris W. wrote:
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 15:00:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:53:09 -0400, Chris W. wend...@cd.ie wrote:
I have a problem when calling D functions from C. While I can
perform simple arithmetic operations (i.e. the calculation
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 15:17:32 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen
wrote:
On 12-03-2012 16:09, Chris W. wrote:
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 15:00:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:53:09 -0400, Chris W. wend...@cd.ie
wrote:
I have a problem when calling D functions from C.
On 12-03-2012 16:36, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:17:31 -0400, Alex Rønne Petersen
xtzgzo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12-03-2012 16:09, Chris W. wrote:
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 15:00:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:53:09 -0400, Chris W.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:17:31 -0400, Alex Rønne Petersen
xtzgzo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12-03-2012 16:09, Chris W. wrote:
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 15:00:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:53:09 -0400, Chris W. wend...@cd.ie wrote:
I have a problem when calling D
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:36:45 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:17:31 -0400, Alex Rønne Petersen
xtzgzo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12-03-2012 16:09, Chris W. wrote:
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 15:00:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 12
On 12 March 2012 01:37, Andrew Wiley wiley.andre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 7:44 PM, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 00:58, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu wrote:
That's an argument for using the right register for the job. And we can /
will be doing this on
On 12 March 2012 00:44, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 00:58, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu wrote:
That's an argument for using the right register for the job. And we can /
will be doing this on x86-64, as other compilers have already done. Manu was
arguing that MRV were
On 12/03/2012 15:38, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
snip
http://dlang.org/phobos/core_runtime.html#initialize
And actually, I think this should do everything necessary. No need to call
gc_init and
thread_attachThis().
Hm... just realized you can't do this, since it's a D function :D
Why can't
On 12 March 2012 19:03, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 00:44, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 00:58, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu wrote:
That's an argument for using the right register for the job. And we can
/
will be doing this on x86-64, as
On Mar 12, 2012, at 9:54 AM, Stewart Gordon smjg_1...@yahoo.com wrote:
On 12/03/2012 15:38, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
snip
http://dlang.org/phobos/core_runtime.html#initialize
And actually, I think this should do everything necessary. No need to call
gc_init and
thread_attachThis().
On Monday, March 12, 2012 09:14:17 Martin Nowak wrote:
So I propose instead a bit of a hack. toHash, opEquals, and opCmp as
struct members be automatically annotated with pure, nothrow, and @safe
(if not already marked as @trusted).
How about complete inference instead of a hack?
Because
On Monday, March 12, 2012 14:23:28 Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 12-03-2012 14:16, deadalnix wrote:
Le 12/03/2012 13:51, Alex Rønne Petersen a écrit :
On 12-03-2012 10:40, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:08 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
What's wrong with auto-inference. Inferred attributes
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:54:25 -0400, Stewart Gordon smjg_1...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On 12/03/2012 15:38, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
snip
http://dlang.org/phobos/core_runtime.html#initialize
And actually, I think this should do everything necessary. No need to
call gc_init and
On 12-03-2012 18:38, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, March 12, 2012 14:23:28 Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 12-03-2012 14:16, deadalnix wrote:
Le 12/03/2012 13:51, Alex Rønne Petersen a écrit :
On 12-03-2012 10:40, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:08 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
What's
On 12 March 2012 17:22, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 19:03, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 00:44, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 00:58, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu wrote:
That's an argument for using the right register for
On 12 March 2012 17:49, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 17:22, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 19:03, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 00:44, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 00:58, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu
On Monday, March 12, 2012 18:44:06 Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
Now, that _does_ introduce the possibility of a template being to be pure
and then not being able to be pure thanks to a change that's made to it
or something that it uses, and that makes impossible for any code using
it to be
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:03:39AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote in message
news:mailman.455.1331448575.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by
incompetence. -- Napoleon Bonaparte
Pardon
On 12 March 2012 19:49, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
OK, -msse2 is not an ARM target option. :~)
Oh sorry, I thought you were asking about the x86 codegen ;)
I used -S -O2 -float-abi=hard
Looking around, the Procedure Call Standard for the ARM Architecture
specifically says
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 01:55:33PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
So, no, I don't think that @ctfe would really work. And while I agree
that the situation isn't exactly ideal, I don't really see a way
around it. Unit tests _do_ catch it for you though. The only thing
that they can't
On Monday, March 12, 2012 11:04:54 H. S. Teoh wrote:
Tangential note: writing unit tests may be tedious, but D's inline
unittest syntax has alleviated a large part of that tedium. So much so
that I find myself writing as much code in unittests as real code.
Which is a good thing, because in
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 02:10:23PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, March 12, 2012 11:04:54 H. S. Teoh wrote:
Tangential note: writing unit tests may be tedious, but D's inline
unittest syntax has alleviated a large part of that tedium. So much so
that I find myself writing as much
On 12-03-2012 19:04, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 01:55:33PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
So, no, I don't think that @ctfe would really work. And while I agree
that the situation isn't exactly ideal, I don't really see a way
around it. Unit tests _do_ catch it for you
On 12-03-2012 18:55, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, March 12, 2012 18:44:06 Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
Now, that _does_ introduce the possibility of a template being to be pure
and then not being able to be pure thanks to a change that's made to it
or something that it uses, and that makes
Marco Leise marco.le...@gmx.de wrote in message
news:20120312124959.2ef8e...@marco-leise.homedns.org...
I searched every inch of Opera's options screens and never
found *any* mention or reference to any Disable AutoUpdate
Derek ddparn...@bigpond.com wrote in message
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 07:41:39PM +0100, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 12-03-2012 19:04, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
Tangential note: writing unit tests may be tedious, but D's inline
unittest syntax has alleviated a large part of that tedium. So much
so that I find myself writing as much code in
On 3/12/2012 11:04 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Tangential note: writing unit tests may be tedious, but D's inline
unittest syntax has alleviated a large part of that tedium. So much so
that I find myself writing as much code in unittests as real code.
Which is a good thing, because in the past I'd
On 12-03-2012 20:08, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 07:41:39PM +0100, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 12-03-2012 19:04, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
Tangential note: writing unit tests may be tedious, but D's inline
unittest syntax has alleviated a large part of that tedium. So much
so
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote in message
news:mailman.531.1331533449.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 01:36:06AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote in message
news:mailman.510.1331520028.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
On 12 March 2012 17:59, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 19:49, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
OK, -msse2 is not an ARM target option. :~)
Oh sorry, I thought you were asking about the x86 codegen ;)
I used -S -O2 -float-abi=hard
Looking around, the Procedure Call
Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com wrote in message
news:op.wa1432xjeav7ka@localhost.localdomain...
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 14:41:53 -0500, Nick Sabalausky a@a.a wrote:
You know what I think it is (without actually looking at the code): I
think
they tried to do some highly misguided and
Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com wrote in message
news:op.wa1432xjeav7ka@localhost.localdomain...
You may want to consider -- if you on principle don't view pages with
information because the pages contain JS, you are the one missing out on
the information.
And it's not on
Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com wrote in message
news:op.wa16bibneav7ka@localhost.localdomain...
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 00:06:40 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Insert obligatory link: http://drdobbs.com/184401197
Very insightful article.
Interesting
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:27:30 -0400, Nick Sabalausky a@a.a wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer schvei...@yahoo.com wrote in message
news:op.wa1432xjeav7ka@localhost.localdomain...
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 14:41:53 -0500, Nick Sabalausky a@a.a wrote:
You know what I think it is (without actually looking at
On 2012-03-12 19:41, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
I stopped writing inline unit tests in larger code bases. If I do that,
I have to maintain a separate build configuration just for test
execution, which is not practical. Furthermore, I want to test my code
in debug and release mode, which... goes
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 02:15:55 -0500, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote:
On 03/12/2012 05:01 AM, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 21:49:52 -0500, Mantis mail.mantis...@gmail.com
wrote:
12.03.2012 4:00, Robert Jacques пишет:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:15:31 -0500, Timon Gehr
That could be solved with a @ctfe attribute or something, no? Like, if
the function has @ctfe, go through all possible CTFE paths (excluding
!__ctfe paths of course) and make sure they are CTFEable.
Everything that's pure should be CTFEable which doesn't imply that you
can turn every
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 04:46:45 -0500, Mantis mail.mantis...@gmail.com wrote:
12.03.2012 6:01, Robert Jacques пишет:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 21:49:52 -0500, Mantis mail.mantis...@gmail.com
wrote:
[...]
That's the point of discussion. Fields of structure may not be optimized
away, because they are not
See subject.
On Monday, March 12, 2012 21:36:21 Martin Nowak wrote:
That could be solved with a @ctfe attribute or something, no? Like, if
the function has @ctfe, go through all possible CTFE paths (excluding
!__ctfe paths of course) and make sure they are CTFEable.
Everything that's pure should be
On Monday, March 12, 2012 11:25:41 H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 02:10:23PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, March 12, 2012 11:04:54 H. S. Teoh wrote:
Tangential note: writing unit tests may be tedious, but D's inline
unittest syntax has alleviated a large part of
I still had meta redirects disabled from when I was reading that Dr Dobbs
article.
On 03/12/2012 09:46 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, March 12, 2012 21:36:21 Martin Nowak wrote:
That could be solved with a @ctfe attribute or something, no? Like, if
the function has @ctfe, go through all possible CTFE paths (excluding
!__ctfe paths of course) and make sure they are
Because that requires having all of the source code. The fact that we
have .di
files prevents that.
It doesn't require all source code.
It just means that without source code nothing can be inferred and the
attributes fall back to what has been annotated by hand.
It could be used to annotated
It could be that they don't care to cater to people who hate
JS. There
aren't that many of you.
There are enough.
Apparently not.
http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/posts/2010/10/how-many-users-have-javascript-disabled/
I'm perfectly willing to give up on 1-2% of Internet users who
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 04:45:39PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
I still had meta redirects disabled from when I was reading that Dr
Dobbs article.
[...]
Somebody should invent per-site meta redirect enabling... :-P In fact,
most browser options should be configurable per site/domain/etc.. (I
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 04:25:54 -0500, Manu turkey...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 March 2012 04:00, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:15:31 -0500, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote:
On 03/11/2012 11:58 PM, Robert Jacques wrote:
Manu was arguing that MRV were somehow
Is this basically like saying it'll never happen?
There is already a pending pull request implementing the syntax, that
addresses half of the feature straight up.. codegen can come later, I
agreed earlier that it is of lesser importance.
You don't see the immediate value in a convenient MRV
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 03:15:32PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote in message
news:mailman.531.1331533449.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
[...]
(And before you shoot me down with infinite quantities are not
practical in programming, I'd like to say
On Monday, 12 March 2012 at 05:44:10 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
I did recently tried it out because I wanted to test some async
Fiber kqueue stuff.
It did fail to compile though because of conflicting selective
imports.
You probably want to avoid those until the remaining issues are
sorted out.
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 00:15:14 -0500, Jose Armando Garcia jsan...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:16 AM, Robert Jacques sandf...@jhu.edu wrote:
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 21:22:21 -0600, Andrei Alexandrescu
1 - 100 of 240 matches
Mail list logo
