On 2012-12-09 08:19, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Well, most of the content on the current Wiki is dead from what I can
understand in our forum discussions.
I think the Library and Frameworks section could be fleshed out.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 11:32:57 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-09 08:19, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Well, most of the content on the current Wiki is dead from
what I can
understand in our forum discussions.
I think the Library and Frameworks section could be fleshed out.
My idea here
W dniu 2012-12-09 07:13, Maxim Fomin pisze:
I agree that moving from prowiki to mediawiki is a good idea, but new
site is just almost empty
(http://dwiki.kimsufi.thecybershadow.net/?title=Special:RecentChanges&days=30&from=&limit=500
see also http://dwiki.kimsufi.thecybershadow.net/Special:AllP
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 13:03:02 UTC, Mariusz Gliwiński
wrote:
W dniu 2012-12-09 07:13, Maxim Fomin pisze:
I agree that moving from prowiki to mediawiki is a good idea,
but new site is just almost empty
(http://dwiki.kimsufi.thecybershadow.net/?title=Special:RecentChanges&days=30&from=&li
On 2012-12-09 13:12, David Nadlinger wrote:
My idea here is that once we have officially decided that we want to go
forward with the new wiki, everybody would just add their own favorite
libraries there. Of course, we could already do this _now_ in theory,
but I think the chance of this happenin
On 2012-12-09 15:45, Dan wrote:
Phobos can and should have a general dup function, capable of duping
(i.e. recursive deep copy) structs without requiring any effort from
struct developers.
[snip]
I think much of this functionality could be shared with serialization. A
few questions and commen
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 13:21:26 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
Are you actually asking to make Vladimir's wikisite accessible
at wiki.dlang.org
Update: It actually is reachable under wiki.dlang.org now.
So, let's work on getting it ready on prime time, and then flip
the switch, i.e. the dlang
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 06:14:16 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
some portion of it is dedicated to developers (Walter Bright,
Alexandrescu and others) which is not very interesting for
those who are seeking language technical details.
I think these pages are mostly the result of playing around
W dniu 2012-12-09 14:21, Maxim Fomin pisze:
Are you actually asking to make Vladimir's wikisite accessible at
wiki.dlang.org (or moving its database to mediawiki instance located
at wiki.dlang.org)? Probably this is a good idea even assuming that
the site is just almost empty - it can be incent
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 16:48:02 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 13:21:26 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
Are you actually asking to make Vladimir's wikisite accessible
at wiki.dlang.org
Update: It actually is reachable under wiki.dlang.org now.
So, let's work on getti
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 16:58:04 UTC, Mariusz Gliwiński
wrote:
W dniu 2012-12-09 14:21, Maxim Fomin pisze:
Are you actually asking to make Vladimir's wikisite accessible
at wiki.dlang.org (or moving its database to mediawiki
instance located at wiki.dlang.org)? Probably this is a good
id
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 17:18:00 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
Agree, but I was not intended to move mediawiki setups: I found
irrelevant whether mediawiki is hosted at dlang.org or at
Vladimir's hosting until the site shows technical problems.
Just to be sure this is clear: Vladimir has gener
On 12/6/12, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> (I'm particularly worried that I may have broken the
> Windows build).
Does anyone know the URL of the original repository? Some symbols are
missing, but I don't think it's Alex'es fault.
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 13:12:48 David Nadlinger wrote:
> My idea here is that once we have officially decided that we want
> to go forward with the new wiki, everybody would just add their
> own favorite libraries there. Of course, we could already do this
> _now_ in theory, but I think the c
On 12/9/12, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 12/6/12, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>> (I'm particularly worried that I may have broken the
>> Windows build).
>
> Does anyone know the URL of the original repository? Some symbols are
> missing, but I don't think it's Alex'es fault.
>
Ok I think I found i
On 12/9/12, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 12/6/12, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>> (I'm particularly worried that I may have broken the
>> Windows build).
std/c/stdio.d is missing _fdToHandle, see steven's repo and just copy
the file over to the new one.
I'm having a hard time figuring out how to "
On 12/9/12 12:12 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 16:48:02 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 13:21:26 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
Are you actually asking to make Vladimir's wikisite accessible at
wiki.dlang.org
Update: It actually is reachable under wik
On 12/8/2012 5:00 PM, Mehrdad wrote:
Copying objects ought to be expensive.
I don't understand the rationale for that.
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 10:58:45 Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/8/2012 5:00 PM, Mehrdad wrote:
> > Copying objects ought to be expensive.
>
> I don't understand the rationale for that.
I can see an argument that there's no requirement that copying objects be
cheap, since there are plenty of o
I'm currently using the rtInfo template inside object.d to generate RTTI
information for my own little rtti system. It is working really well so
far, the only issue I found is as follows:
If a POD struct (which does not contain any reference types, pointers,
arrays etc) is placed in a library.
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 19:17:06 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 10:58:45 Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/8/2012 5:00 PM, Mehrdad wrote:
> Copying objects ought to be expensive.
I don't understand the rationale for that.
I can see an argument that there's no require
To elaborate... what's the point of making everything cheap to
copy?
Copying of an object is _not_ an operation like swap() or "move",
which are essential to many algorithms.
Indeed, an object might not want to be copyable at all, or it
might need to perform some expensive operation (as in J
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 20:02:15 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
I never find the need to copy other objects...
Correction:
I _rarely_ find the need to copy other objects for _generic_ (er,
templated) types (iterators being the exception I mentioned).
But obviously copying is essential for many
stemming from:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/azqevtjaoafbapiad...@forum.dlang.org
I believe the following idea would offer good benefit for
encapsulation in classes(increases the divide and conquer
approach):
For structs in classes(call them cstructs if you want):
prototype:
class A
{
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 21:02:14 Mehrdad wrote:
> So basically, algorithms should _expect_ copying of arbitrary
> objects to be expensive, and there's no need for them to be
> otherwise. C++'s swap() illustrates the lack of the need for
> copying beautifully -- often times the only objects I c
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 20:14:18 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Algorithms end up copying all the time
Hmm... like which ones, and copying what kinds of objects?
On 12/9/2012 11:36 AM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
If a POD struct (which does not contain any reference types, pointers, arrays
etc) is placed in a library. And that library is then linked against a
executable, the rtInfo of the POD struct will be lost. It will be generated by
the compiler when compil
Am 09.12.2012 21:22, schrieb Walter Bright:>
>
> Template instances are written to COMDAT sections, which are stripped
> out if they are not referenced.
>
But why does adding a void* pointer make a difference then? By adding a
void* pointer to the struct it will still not be referenced
Before
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 21:21:10 Mehrdad wrote:
> On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 20:14:18 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > Algorithms end up copying all the time
>
> Hmm... like which ones, and copying what kinds of objects?
Just calling front on a range is going to copy the element, and
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 12:36:09 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Sunday, December 09, 2012 21:21:10 Mehrdad wrote:
> > On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 20:14:18 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Algorithms end up copying all the time
> >
> > Hmm... like which ones, and copying what kinds
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 18:56:13 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
We have a private host provider and admin (not sure whether I
can give the name).
Well, given that he is acknowledged at the bottom of
digitalmars.com… ;)
David
Ok I tried to manually reference it, it does not help.
struct Quaternion {
float x,y,z,angle;
}
class ForceReference
{
Quaternion q;
}
shared static this()
{
Quaternion q;
auto t = typeid(Quaternion);
auto info = RTInfo!Quaternion;
printf("%x %x\n", info, t.rtInfo);
}
Althoug
On 12/9/2012 11:16 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
That's kind of the point of having posblits in the first place,
As I argued previously, the only justification I can think of for postblit is
for reference counting. The counters posted here were variations on reference
counting, or could be done
On 12/9/2012 12:28 PM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
But why does adding a void* pointer make a difference then? By adding a void*
pointer to the struct it will still not be referenced
Before (broken):
struct Pod { float x; }
After (working):
struct Pod { float x; void* ptr; }
I suggest looking at
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 13:11:43 Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/9/2012 11:16 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > That's kind of the point of having posblits in the first place,
>
> As I argued previously, the only justification I can think of for postblit
> is for reference counting. The counters p
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 13:41:46 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Declaring a struct which contains reference types and does a deep copy with
> postblit obviously incurs a performance cost, but it's up to the programmer
> who declared it to decide whether that's worth it or not. I see no reason
> for
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 22:10:50 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 13:41:46 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Declaring a struct which contains reference types and does a
deep copy with
postblit obviously incurs a performance cost, but it's up to
the programmer
who declared
It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on tidying up the
regressions.
This will be the last official D1 release.
On 10-12-2012 01:33, Walter Bright wrote:
It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on tidying
up the regressions.
This will be the last official D1 release.
A few pull requests I'd *really* like to have in this release:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pul
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 00:34:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on
tidying up the regressions.
This will be the last official D1 release.
Totally amazing to read this. Thank all of you for your efforts!
Furthermore, is there a d
Just talked to Walter and there seems to be no contest that the proposed
wiki is nicer than the existing one, in addition to having quite a few
people enthusiastic about it.
It's official - http://wiki.dlang.org is our new wiki home. Let's slowly
work together on bringing over more interesting
On 12/9/2012 4:42 PM, alex wrote:
Furthermore, is there a dedicated list of changes made to the D spec? Just to
ensure that my parser still recognizes all language features ;)
Going through the "What's New" section of the changelog should do that.
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 16:33:44 Walter Bright wrote:
> It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on tidying up
> the regressions.
Can we please get dmd pull# 1287 ( https://github.com/D-Programming-
Language/dmd/pull/1287 ) resolved before the next release (preferably by
m
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 00:47:09 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
It's official - http://wiki.dlang.org is our new wiki home.
Redirects from temporary hostname enabled and search engines
unblocked. :)
Is anyone else noticing e.g. std.datetime taking upwards of 30 seconds
to render the blob of links at the top? It's freakin freezing my entire
browser.
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 01:38:16AM +0100, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 10-12-2012 01:33, Walter Bright wrote:
> >It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on tidying
> >up the regressions.
> >
> >This will be the last official D1 release.
>
> A few pull requests I'd *really* l
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 18:10:42 Ellery Newcomer wrote:
> Is anyone else noticing e.g. std.datetime taking upwards of 30 seconds
> to render the blob of links at the top? It's freakin freezing my entire
> browser.
The link situation definitely needs to be fixed. People keep making noise
abou
On 12/09/2012 08:10 PM, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
Is anyone else noticing e.g. std.datetime taking upwards of 30 seconds
to render the blob of links at the top? It's freakin freezing my entire
browser.
Yeah, I see it.
Not browser stalling though, just annoying.
It renders without the links, free
On 12/9/2012 2:10 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
You're basically suggesting that we disallow any idiom which requires that
structs be deep copied, and I think that that's bad policy. It's one thing to
encourage programmers to not write such structs and to use other idioms like
COW or reference coun
On Saturday, 8 December 2012 at 19:54:29 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
wrote:
12/8/2012 9:08 PM, Nick Sabalausky пишет:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 19:55:50 +0400
Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
12/7/2012 1:43 PM, deadalnix пишет:
On Friday, 7 December 2012 at 09:03:58 UTC, Dejan Lekic
wrote:
On Friday, 7 December
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 03:53:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I do not dispute that deep copy is commonly used in C++. I
challenge the idea that it is a good design pattern, i.e.
better than using copy-on-write.
Ignoring the design issue, it's plain faster -- for COW you have
to perfor
On Sunday, December 09, 2012 19:52:15 Walter Bright wrote:
> We already disallow several C++ idioms - like multiple inheritance, using a
> type as both a value and a reference type, and head const. We believe that
> these are bad design patterns, despite them being used often in C++.
Well, I certa
On Monday, December 10, 2012 05:12:17 Mehrdad wrote:
> On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 03:53:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> > I do not dispute that deep copy is commonly used in C++. I
> > challenge the idea that it is a good design pattern, i.e.
> > better than using copy-on-write.
>
> Ignoring th
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 03:53:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/9/2012 2:10 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
You're basically suggesting that we disallow any idiom which
requires that
structs be deep copied, and I think that that's bad policy.
It's one thing to
encourage programmers to not w
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 00:34:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on
tidying up the regressions.
This will be the last official D1 release.
Several things :
1/ Is it possible to reenable the GC ? The argument saying that
this is fa
On Monday, December 10, 2012 08:11:52 deadalnix wrote:
> 3/ Now that UDA are in master, what to do with them ? They
> clearly are not ready for release.
Move them to a branch and remove them from master.
- Jonathan M Davis
On 2012-12-09 19:34, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I'm having a hard time figuring out how to "fork" your own fork, IOW I
have no idea how to make pull requests towards your own fork of
phobos. Your name doesn't show up in the base repo dropdown list when
I try to make a pull, otherwise I'd be of more
On 2012-12-10 08:16, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, December 10, 2012 08:11:52 deadalnix wrote:
3/ Now that UDA are in master, what to do with them ? They
clearly are not ready for release.
Move them to a branch and remove them from master.
It will be interesting to see what happens.
--
On 2012-12-10 08:11, deadalnix wrote:
Several things :
1/ Is it possible to reenable the GC ? The argument saying that this is
faster without only work on toy project. On any real size project, the
huge amount of memory consumed cause swapping, which make things way
slower.
2/ I'd really like t
On Monday, December 10, 2012 08:40:25 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> 4. What will happen to Win64, is that ready for release?
It'll probably be left in with the changelog stating that it's at alpha
quality. That's pretty much what happened with 64-bit support on Linux.
- Jonathan M Davis
On 2012-12-10 01:33, Walter Bright wrote:
It's time to do a release; to that end we should be working on tidying
up the regressions.
What about the release and development process we've been talking about
for, I don't know, the last three releases. What's happening on that front?
This will
On Monday, December 10, 2012 08:50:39 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> > This will be the last official D1 release.
>
> Is it already time? Still no support for dynamic libraries in sight:
>
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/jc0ic5$18bv$2...@digitalmars.com?page=8#post-jc9q
> us:248o0:242:40digitalmars.com
62 matches
Mail list logo
