28.09.2012 20:47, Peter Alexander пишет:
On Friday, 28 September 2012 at 09:43:34 UTC, Timur Gafarov wrote:
dlib is a growing collection of native D language libraries serving as
a framework for various higher-level projects - such as game engines,
rendering pipelines and multimedia
On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 18:20:12 -0700
Brad Roberts bra...@slice-2.puremagic.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Sep 2012, Walter Bright wrote:
True, but I would never write code that tried to throw an exception
across language boundaries, anyway. It's just asking for trouble.
And that's fine for your
On Saturday, September 29, 2012 06:41:01 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 18:20:12 -0700
Brad Roberts bra...@slice-2.puremagic.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Sep 2012, Walter Bright wrote:
True, but I would never write code that tried to throw an exception
across language boundaries,
On 2012-09-28 19:47, Peter Alexander wrote:
A note on your Vector implementation. Currently you use the vector
operators, e.g.
Vector!(T,size) opAddAssign (Vector!(T,size) v)
body
{
arrayof[] += v.arrayof[];
return this;
}
This is fine for large vectors,
On 2012-09-29 03:01, Walter Bright wrote:
True, but I would never write code that tried to throw an exception
across language boundaries, anyway. It's just asking for trouble.
If everything is working correctly and is compatible it shouldn't be any
problems.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 9/29/12, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com wrote:
On 2012-09-29 03:01, Walter Bright wrote:
True, but I would never write code that tried to throw an exception
across language boundaries, anyway. It's just asking for trouble.
If everything is working correctly and is compatible it shouldn't be
On 28-Sep-12 21:47, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Friday, 28 September 2012 at 09:43:34 UTC, Timur Gafarov wrote:
dlib is a growing collection of native D language libraries serving as
a framework for various higher-level projects - such as game engines,
rendering pipelines and multimedia
On 29-Sep-12 20:39, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
On 28-Sep-12 21:47, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Friday, 28 September 2012 at 09:43:34 UTC, Timur Gafarov wrote:
dlib is a growing collection of native D language libraries serving as
a framework for various higher-level projects - such as game engines,
On 2012-09-29 18:08, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Also how are we supposed to control when a C++ library throws? We
could wrap every single function wrapper with a try/catch, but won't
this create a massive slowdown?
I'm not sure but I don't think so. As I understand it, DWARF on Posix
and SEH on
On 9/29/12, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com wrote:
I'm not sure but I don't think so. As I understand it, DWARF on Posix
and SEH on Windows are zero-cost exception handling systems. This means
that there will be no performance loss at runtime as long as no
exception is thrown. setjmp/longjmp on the
On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 18:33:31 -0700
José Armando García Sancio jsan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Nick Sabalausky
seewebsitetocontac...@semitwist.com wrote:
(My apologies if the article's author is reading this, no offense
was intended.)
Doubt it. I believe the
2012/9/29 Tommi tommitiss...@hotmail.com:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 04:26:01 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
It's an awful lot of magic (it's not as easy in the implementation as it
sounds like) for questionable gain when we have the with statement IMO.
it's not as easy in the
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 06:11:30 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
(Had to look up that name) Ahh, I see. That explains the
dismissal of
metaprogramming and generics, and the dismissal Go's objectors
via a roundabout strawman (Ie by complaining about the act of
complaining, and by
On 29 September 2012 04:12, Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/29/12, Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com wrote:
you could simply use with to solve the problem:
with(MyFruit)
{
switch(fruit)
{
case apple: break;
case orange: break;
On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 10:08:29 +0200
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
He's not dismissive of their importance. The point was that if
you can dismiss a language based solely on its lack of generics
Goes back to my other original point:
---
2. [He's dismissing]
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:27:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
If he were talking about some minor insignificant feature, then
I agree
it'd be goofy to reject a language solely because of that. But
that's
not what's happening. Generics are a major thing. Many people
*do* find
them to
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:27:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
Problem is, that's irrelevant: The important point he's missing
is
If feature X is helpful, then why should I *bother* going
without, when there are plenty of other languages (such as the
one I'm
already using) that *do*
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:53:57 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:27:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
If he were talking about some minor insignificant feature,
then I agree
it'd be goofy to reject a language solely because of that. But
that's
not what's
Yeah, to respond to the larger topic, the with statement
is more than enough here. I'm not convinced that complicating
lookup rules further is worth it.
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 11:18:40 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:53:57 UTC, Peter Alexander
My question to you: Is it okay to reject D solely with these
arguments? If not, how is this any different from rejecting Go
solely from its lack of generics?
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:53:57 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
So, with this in mind, do you think these hypothetical people
are all justified?
(a) [Go programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have
channels.
(b) [Lisp programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have
On 9/28/12 5:54 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Friday, 28 September 2012 at 17:42:07 UTC, Froglegs wrote:
The Rust website says this:
Generic types yes, only simple, non-turing-complete substitution
After seeing that I just assumed the language was worthless and
ignored it.. is there something
On 2012-09-28 19:09, deadalnix wrote:
It is ambiguous with the comma declaration syntax.
I could live without it.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2012-09-28 20:25, Maxim Fomin wrote:
I tried to check how TLS, EX, etc. (mostly exposed to dll issue) are
working and here is some kind of test:
https://github.com/mxfm/sharedtest. Unfortunately scope(exit) isn't
executed when it is situated in a shared library and which calls some
throwing
On 2012-09-28 19:54, Rob T wrote:
I suppose the answer is very complicated, but why can't the runtime
execute as a shared lib? Is it a design limitation of the runtime model?
This sort of problem should have been dealt with from the ground up, not
now. What can be done to fix it, or is it a
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 12:09:35 UTC, Thiez wrote:
Would you agree D would be better if it had those features?
Maybe. Maybe not. It's irrelevant.
How about we rephrase to something less inflammatory:
[Go programmer]: I prefer not to use D because it doesn't have
channels.
[Lisp
On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:15:56 -0400
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
(I don't see how the parallel with the actress anecdote holds, as the
punchline there is that an actor has to imagine being in other lines
of work as the very part of acting.)
I'd been thinking the
On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 13:06:33 +0200
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
The answer to that question is obvious: you should bother going
without because other languages provide other things that your
pet language does not (e.g. channels + simplicity in this case).
Searching
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 12:04:50 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 11:18:40 UTC, Paulo Pinto
wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:53:57 UTC, Peter Alexander
My question to you: Is it okay to reject D solely with these
arguments? If not, how is this
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 14:03:52 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
And sometimes I need to get work done instead of trying out all
of the
100's of languages out there in some altruistic quest to be
fair to
everybody.
Nothing wrong with that, but rejecting a language because you
don't
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 05:47:59 UTC, Bernard Helyer
wrote:
Except a theoretical feature doesn't exist, so someone has
to write the code. So no, it's not an 'unacceptable
argument'.
I'll explain my way of seeing this in the form we all understand:
code.
bool tryImplement(Feature
On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 12:54:26 +0200
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:27:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
If he were talking about some minor insignificant feature, then
I agree
it'd be goofy to reject a language solely because of
On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 14:05:19 +0200
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
Interestingly, Rob Pike comments on this world view:
http://commandcenter.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/less-is-exponentially-more.html
Early in the rollout of Go I was told by someone that he could
not
On 29/09/2012 04:11, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 9/29/12, David Piepgrass qwertie...@gmail.com wrote:
I like the spirit of this feature, but as Alex pointed out,
ambiguity is possible (which could theoretically cause errors in
existing code)
It could also cause subtle problems because enum
On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 16:15:51 +0200
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 14:03:52 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
And sometimes I need to get work done instead of trying out all
of the
100's of languages out there in some altruistic quest to
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 07:04:19 UTC, kenji hara wrote:
After a while, you may add a global variable in module scope.
enum E { foo ,bar }
int foo = 10;
void test(E e) {}
void main() {
test(foo); // foo is defined, and look up module scope foo.
// Then, now the code is
Hi guys.
I was browsing the book Programming in D by Ali Çehreli. It
was pretty much clear, and then I stumbled upon this on page 89:
20.9 Exercises
1. Browse the documentations of the std.string, std.array,
std.algorithm, and std.range modules.
OK, let's open the D website and browse the
On 09/29/2012 05:30 PM, Mr. Anonymous wrote:
Hi guys.
I was browsing the book Programming in D by Ali Çehreli. It was pretty
much clear, and then I stumbled upon this on page 89:
20.9 Exercises
1. Browse the documentations of the std.string, std.array,
std.algorithm, and std.range modules.
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 13:19:01 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
That's a fairly uninteresting test.
I am not a D developer which means I have no incentive in blindly
portraying D as a language having shared libraries support when
in fact it has some issues. I am a D user which has
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 15:29:46 UTC, Mr. Anonymous
wrote:
1. Browse the documentations of the std.string, std.array,
std.algorithm, and std.range modules.
OK, let's open the D website and browse the documentation of
std.string:
http://dlang.org/phobos/std_string.html
What do we
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 15:46:36 UTC, MattCoder wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 15:29:46 UTC, Mr. Anonymous
wrote:
1. Browse the documentations of the std.string, std.array,
std.algorithm, and std.range modules.
OK, let's open the D website and browse the documentation of
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 15:29:46 UTC, Mr. Anonymous
wrote:
Hi guys.
I was browsing the book Programming in D by Ali Çehreli. It
was pretty much clear, and then I stumbled upon this on page 89:
20.9 Exercises
1. Browse the documentations of the std.string, std.array,
std.algorithm,
On 2012-09-29 17:40, Maxim Fomin wrote:
I was not taking about dynamic loading, but about dynamic linking. If I
understand topic right, the issue is the former, not the latter.
The title of the thread says ... and loading.
BTW, in majority cases dynamic loading gives no advantages over
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 15:53:17 UTC, Mr. Anonymous
wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying somebody owes me something.
I love D and appreciate the effort the community puts in it,
otherwise I probably wouldn't write this post.
I'm just saying that, in my opinion, it's a high
And there's also the D Templates Tutorial at:
https://github.com/PhilippeSigaud/D-templates-tutorial/blob/master/dtemplates.pdf
(click View Raw on that page)
On 9/29/12 11:30 AM, Mr. Anonymous wrote:
I think documentation is really important, and something has to be done
about it. How can a newcomer get started with D when he doesn't have a
readable documentation of Phobos?
Agree. It's high time we replace the silly litany of names at the top
with
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 14:27:03 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
My question to you: Is it okay to reject D solely with these
arguments?
If it's in-line with their needs, then yes. It'd be both
selfish and
absurd for us to demand that everyone tries out and becomes
proficient
with our
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 16:34:41 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/29/12 11:30 AM, Mr. Anonymous wrote:
I think documentation is really important, and something has
to be done
about it. How can a newcomer get started with D when he
doesn't have a
readable documentation of Phobos?
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 17:03:26 UTC, monarch_dodra
wrote:
Well, they *are* better than nothing at all. Sure, in the best
of worlds, we'd have lovingly hand written indexes and
documentation, such as for std_algorithm. However, for those
modules that *don't* have that hand written
Le 29/09/2012 19:09, Adam D. Ruppe a écrit :
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 17:03:26 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
Well, they *are* better than nothing at all. Sure, in the best of
worlds, we'd have lovingly hand written indexes and documentation,
such as for std_algorithm. However, for those
On 29-Sep-12 21:13, deadalnix wrote:
Le 29/09/2012 19:09, Adam D. Ruppe a écrit :
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 17:03:26 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
Well, they *are* better than nothing at all. Sure, in the best of
worlds, we'd have lovingly hand written indexes and documentation,
such as
On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 19:04:01 +0200
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 14:27:03 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
My question to you: Is it okay to reject D solely with these
arguments?
If it's in-line with their needs, then yes. It'd be
But, if we were allowed to make a breaking change, then this is
how I think it should work:
// in a module scope...
enum E { foo, bar };
-
// These cause a compile error foo is ambiguous:
1) E foo = E.bar;
2) E foo = E.foo;
3) enum
On 9/29/12 2:44 PM, Tommi wrote:
But, if we were allowed to make a breaking change
I stopped reading here :o).
Andrei
On 9/29/2012 1:08 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
As you can see, no matter what you think of these features, the arguments are
pointless because it is very clear that you can do meaningful work without them.
We get by without channels, homoiconicity, and full program type inference; just
as the Go
On 9/29/2012 3:54 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
So, with this in mind, do you think these hypothetical people are all justified?
(a) [Go programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have channels.
(b) [Lisp programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have homoiconicity.
(c) [Haskell programmer]:
On 9/29/2012 5:05 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
There's two ways to interpret this sentence:
1. You claim it is okay to reject Go because it differs from other statically
typed languages, or
2. You claim that all statically typed languages must have generics to be worth
using.
I hope it is not 1,
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 17:03:33 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
I'm sure most people here have seen similar arguments against
D.
The complaint I've seen in a similar vain have been, D is too
complex it has everything and the kitchen sink if someone
asks for it, it gets added
And
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 19:09:46 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/29/2012 1:08 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
As you can see, no matter what you think of these features,
the arguments are
pointless because it is very clear that you can do meaningful
work without them.
We get by without
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 19:09:46 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/29/2012 1:08 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
As you can see, no matter what you think of these features,
the arguments are
pointless because it is very clear that you can do meaningful
work without them.
We get by without
Scratch my previous post. It had a weird rule where the types of
identifiers had a say in whether or not there's ambiguity in the
name lookup. That's just silly. It should always be an ambiguity
error if the names are identical.
This new rule is easier to conceptualize too. Basically you just
On 09/29/2012 09:12 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/29/2012 3:54 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
So, with this in mind, do you think these hypothetical people are all
justified?
(a) [Go programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have channels.
(b) [Lisp programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't
On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 00:12:33 +0200
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 19:09:46 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
I think that argument is making the claims that:
1. all features are equally valuable
2. if one can get by without a feature,
1. all features are equally valuable
2. if one can get by without a feature, then that feature is
not needed
Both of those are invalid.
I'm not making claim 1, and claim 2 is true by definition.
Brainfuck has all the needed language features by that definition.
Although it's not very obvious what is a hot-spot and what is
not.
enum Char { a, b, c, d }
Char a = c; // OK: 'c' is in a hot-spot
Char b = c + 1; // ERROR: 'c' is undefined, because it's not in
// a hot-spot and therefore Char enumerations
// aren't visible.
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 02:57:42 UTC, David Piepgrass
wrote:
I have a feature request: Named enum scope inference
The idea is, that whenever a named enum value is expected, you
don't need to explicitly specify the scope of the enum value.
This would reduce redundancy in typing, just
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 23:49:47 UTC, Tommi wrote:
It is quite a mess. I think I'm ready to admit that this is not
a feature we'd like to have in this language (probably not in
any language for that matter).
Using with should do the trick just fine for the few situations
where
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 17:20:48 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
wrote:
Agreed. What's needed to make it a reality ?
Need to integrate my helper program into the website build
process.
Program here:
http://arsdnet.net/d-web-site/improveddoc.d
libs needed
On Sunday, September 30, 2012 04:17:59 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
When I tried this earlier, I couldn't even get the basic website
to build on my box from github. I think it needs github phobos
too but meh, I moved on to something else and never got back to
it.
Unless something's changed recently,
Go looks like a horrible combination of C and Lua, lacking the
speed of C and the power of Lua(and I'd bet LuaJIT beats Go for
performance).
Not all features are equal, for me, meta programming is such a
useful thing that a language better have something damn
impressive to replace
28.09.2012 01:24, Philippe Sigaud пишет:
Here is an example:
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/81a63163
it's really interesting for me.
Seeing your code in another thread, yes code generation could help
here. I have a template tutorial (a bit light on code generation) that
might help you on this.
On Friday, 28 September 2012 at 22:20:54 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
On 9/28/12, Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com wrote:
I have some win32 cairo samples on my github page.
Here you go: https://github.com/AndrejMitrovic/cairoDSamples
Just follow the readme instructions.
Wow, thank
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 13:03:31 UTC, Philippe Sigaud
wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Zhenya zh...@list.ru wrote:
Thank you,understood.
This should work, hopefully:
import std.stdio;
import std.typetuple;
template sum(U...)
{
static if(U.length == 0)
On 9/29/12, KillerSponge killerspo...@gmail.com wrote:
Wow, thank you so much for the quick reply and all the effort! I
am going to try this out as soon as I can (which probably won't
be until Monday, sorry..) and let you know how it works out :)
No problem. I also have some samples written
This behaviour seems inconsistent and unintuitive:
void main() {
int[3] a = [1,2,3];
a = [4, a[0], 6];
struct S {
int a, b, c;
}
S s = S(1,2,3);
s = S(4, s.a, 6);
assert(a == [4,1,6]);
assert(s == S(4,4,6));
}
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 16:05:03 UTC, ixid wrote:
This behaviour seems inconsistent and unintuitive:
void main() {
int[3] a = [1,2,3];
a = [4, a[0], 6];
struct S {
int a, b, c;
}
S s = S(1,2,3);
s = S(4, s.a, 6);
On 09/29/2012 06:26 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 16:05:03 UTC, ixid wrote:
This behaviour seems inconsistent and unintuitive:
void main() {
int[3] a = [1,2,3];
a = [4, a[0], 6];
struct S {
int a, b, c;
}
S s = S(1,2,3);
s = S(4,
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 18:16:24 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
This seems to be a DMD bug.
And a pretty serious looking one at that. That bug could make
nukes fly to wrong coordinates, and that just ruins everybody's
day.
On 09/29/2012 11:16 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/29/2012 06:26 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
S s = S(1,2,3);
s = S(4, s.a, 6);
assert(a == [4,1,6]);
assert(s == S(4,4,6));
}
Setting the struct writes s.a before evaluating it while the reverse
is true of the array assignment. Using DMD 2.0.60.
On 09/29/2012 04:02 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/30/2012 12:51 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 09/29/2012 11:16 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/29/2012 06:26 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
S s = S(1,2,3);
s = S(4, s.a, 6);
assert(a == [4,1,6]);
assert(s == S(4,4,6));
}
Setting the struct writes
// Tell me about this sutation, may be it is a bug?
import std.math;
import std.stdio;
struct Vector(int size)
{
union
{
float[size] array = 0;
struct
{
static if (size == 2) float x, y;
On Sunday, 30 September 2012 at 00:24:34 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 09/29/2012 04:02 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/30/2012 12:51 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 09/29/2012 11:16 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/29/2012 06:26 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
S s = S(1,2,3);
s = S(4, s.a, 6);
assert(a ==
On 09/29/2012 08:13 PM, ixid wrote:
On Sunday, 30 September 2012 at 00:24:34 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 09/29/2012 04:02 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/30/2012 12:51 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 09/29/2012 11:16 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/29/2012 06:26 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
S s =
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8734
--- Comment #3 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2012-09-28
23:29:56 PDT ---
I think it would slow things down in general.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8734
Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8736
Summary: DMD should translate slashes in -of on Windows
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8737
Summary: Associative Array (AA) KeyType is not Unqual-able
Product: D
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P2
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8737
--- Comment #1 from monarchdo...@gmail.com 2012-09-29 15:55:11 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Here, the implementer of foo is unable to tranform his keys, because their
types are not mutable.
I meant to
The real problem is that KeyType
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8733
Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8736
Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8128
--- Comment #3 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2012-09-29 18:52:28 PDT ---
Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8738
Summary: Struct assignment constructor order of operations DMD
2.0.6
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
92 matches
Mail list logo
