10.12.2012 4:29, Walter Bright пишет:
Is now pointing to the new media wiki setup.
Great news! Wiki matters!
--
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij
10.12.2012 6:10, Ellery Newcomer пишет:
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.
Personally I disable JavaScript for dlang.org a long time ago and happy
now. At least because the
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 00:47:09 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
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
10.12.2012 4:33, Walter Bright пишет:
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.
Sorry, but I have never understand how can anybody call D stable and why
are you doing all this support.
Let me
06.12.2012 22:40, Alex Rønne Petersen пишет:
Hi,
I decided to take a stab at reviving the new std.process written by Lars
T. Kyllingstad and Steven Schveighoffer.
The result is here:
https://github.com/alexrp/phobos/tree/new-std-process-update
I decided to extract the work into new commits
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.
[SNIP]
Andrei
Neat-o!
As an admin/b-crat on several other (very) large wikis, I'll get
to contributing.
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 03:18:30 UTC, 1100110 wrote:
On 12/09/2012 08:10 PM, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
The whole process only takes 5-7 seconds here.
Only is not the right word to use here.
On 12/9/2012 11:06 PM, deadalnix wrote:
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
On 12/9/2012 8:17 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Not to mention, unless you can find ways to implement everything that you'd
need a postblit or copy constructor to do without them and get rid of
postblits, doing deep copies is going to be possible. And in the process of
getting rid of postblits,
On 12/9/2012 11:50 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
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.
On 12/9/2012 11:40 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
4. What will happen to Win64, is that ready for release?
It will be an 'alpha' for Win64.
On 12/10/2012 12:56 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
A long time ago I wrote one (not open source) application in D1+Tango.
I'm still supporting it. The last D1 compiler I can use is 1.066 as then a fatal
regression was introduced and templates became unusable because of ICE. Am I the
only one who
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 02:10:43 UTC, 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.
ddox* on dlang.org, anyone?
http://vibed.org/temp/phobos/index.html
*
On Saturday, 8 December 2012 at 21:47:32 UTC, Dan wrote:
My approach is to have a general dup function. I call it gdup,
for global dup so the name does not conflict with the existing
dup. It dup's fields recursively. Feel free to have a look and
any suggestions appreciated. Would greatly
On 2012-12-10 09:56, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
Sorry, but I have never understand how can anybody call D stable and why
are you doing all this support.
Let me explain:
A long time ago I wrote one (not open source) application in D1+Tango.
I'm still supporting it. The last D1 compiler I can
On 2012-12-10 12:07, Walter Bright wrote:
If someone wants to do the work to support them, I'll fold it in.
Same old, same old. I guess I have to do it myself if I want something done.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Friday, 7 December 2012 at 18:44:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Friday, December 07, 2012 18:18:43 monarch_dodra wrote:
I had actually been through this before, and someone told me
about that. The problem at this point is that this isn't even
an
option anymore, since std/algorithm.d is
On 12/10/2012 4:30 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 12:07, Walter Bright wrote:
If someone wants to do the work to support them, I'll fold it in.
Same old, same old. I guess I have to do it myself if I want something done.
BTW, I've fixed every bug report on the dynamic libraries
On 12/7/2012 2:51 PM, deadalnix wrote:
I'm working on a program that now require more than 2.5Gb of RAM to compile,
where separate compilation is not possible due to bug 8997 and that randomly
fails to compile due to bug 8596. It is NOT fast and that insane memory
consumption is a major cause of
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 11:39:24 UTC, Thiez wrote:
On Saturday, 8 December 2012 at 21:47:32 UTC, Dan wrote:
My approach is to have a general dup function. I call it gdup,
for global dup so the name does not conflict with the existing
dup. It dup's fields recursively. Feel free to have a
On Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 16:26:12 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
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
On 2012-12-10 13:43, Walter Bright wrote:
BTW, I've fixed every bug report on the dynamic libraries where anyone
identified an issue with how dmd generates PIC code for dynamic libraries.
Yeah, that's great. But that doesn't make dynamic libraries magically
work. The runtime still need to
On 2012-12-10 14:03, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Yeah, that's great. But that doesn't make dynamic libraries magically
work. The runtime still need to support it. On Mac OS X there will most
likely need to be made some changes to the compiler as well. I'm
thinking mostly to support TLS, the
On 2012-12-10 13:56, Dan wrote:
However, if template mixins are preferred to
string mixins I suppose that is a good idea for that code and I'll check
it out.
Yes, templates are always preferred. One should try to avoid putting
code in string literals as much as possible.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 12/10/2012 5:03 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 13:43, Walter Bright wrote:
BTW, I've fixed every bug report on the dynamic libraries where anyone
identified an issue with how dmd generates PIC code for dynamic libraries.
Yeah, that's great. But that doesn't make dynamic libraries
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 12:45:16 UTC, Dan wrote:
That would be an infinite loop. If you have a compile time
cycle you would likely need your own custom dups anyway, as you
are doing low level and heap allocating already. But for the
simpler cases without cycles, if dup encounters a
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 13:37:46 UTC, Thiez wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 12:45:16 UTC, Dan wrote:
That would be an infinite loop. If you have a compile time
cycle you would likely need your own custom dups anyway, as
you are doing low level and heap allocating already. But for
On 12/09/2012 03:45 PM, 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. This can be done to cover the vast majority of object copy issues
for structs
We already had some
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 15:36:44 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
On 12/09/2012 03:45 PM, 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. This can be done to cover
10.12.2012 15:11, Walter Bright пишет:
On 12/10/2012 12:56 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
A long time ago I wrote one (not open source) application in D1+Tango.
I'm still supporting it. The last D1 compiler I can use is 1.066 as
then a fatal
regression was introduced and templates became
12/10/2012 8:12 AM, Mehrdad пишет:
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
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 11:03:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/9/2012 8:17 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Not to mention, unless you can find ways to implement
everything that you'd
need a postblit or copy constructor to do without them and get
rid of
postblits, doing deep copies is
On 06-12-2012 23:25, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-06 19:40, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
Hi,
I decided to take a stab at reviving the new std.process written by Lars
T. Kyllingstad and Steven Schveighoffer.
The result is here:
https://github.com/alexrp/phobos/tree/new-std-process-update
I
On 10-12-2012 10:04, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
06.12.2012 22:40, Alex Rønne Petersen пишет:
Hi,
I decided to take a stab at reviving the new std.process written by Lars
T. Kyllingstad and Steven Schveighoffer.
The result is here:
https://github.com/alexrp/phobos/tree/new-std-process-update
I
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:10:42 -0800
Ellery Newcomer ellery-newco...@utulsa.edu 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.
It only takes about a second or two for me in FF2. I'm
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:34:13PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:10:42 -0800
Ellery Newcomer ellery-newco...@utulsa.edu 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
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 11:03:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Have you ever written a struct that requires a deep copy?
I have, and I always wound up redoing it so the deep copy was
unnecessary.
How do you get around it? Let's say you have an address book
structure that organizes
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:45:06 -0800
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:34:13PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:10:42 -0800
Ellery Newcomer ellery-newco...@utulsa.edu wrote:
Is anyone else noticing e.g. std.datetime taking upwards of
On 2012-12-10 17:06, Dan wrote:
I think so. Here is a claim I think is true: gdup must do full deep copy
to be safe and guarantee the transitive const/immutable. If it is
implemented such that there are no casts, then the compiler does its job
and ensures everything is good. If there are casts
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 18:55:09 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I'm pretty sure it can't be done. For classes one need to
bypass the constructor. The constructor is the only place where
you can initialize const/immutable fields. For class instance
one would need to cast it to a ubyte
On 12/09/2012 07:34 PM, 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 Sunday, 9 December 2012 at 03:33:07 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
On Thursday, 6 December 2012 at 23:01:19 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Thursday, 6 December 2012 at 21:49:21 UTC, Phil Lavoie
wrote:
I mean automatically dispatch to template members, not doing
it in a case by case fashion (using
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 07:47:08PM -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
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
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 16:52:54 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
The talk deviated to postblit, but in the original argument,
the entire point of the thread is to have extra support for
reference-type objects: Objects that are basically nothing more
than a pointer. You'd have a hard time
On 2012-12-10 20:07, Dan wrote:
Only talking about structs here. classes were listed under issues not
covered.
You might have the same problem with structs. That is, if it's possible
to have const/immutable files which are not initialized in the declaration.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 11:16:32PM -0800, 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.
[...]
Wouldn't this be
On 2012-12-10 20:37, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
You might have the same problem with structs. That is, if it's possible
to have const/immutable files which are not initialized in the declaration.
That should have been fields.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2012-12-10 17:59, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
Can you run it on 64-bit too? Does the output differ?
Same output.
Can you try to adjust the code in std.stdio a bit so it prints the
actual exit code pclose() returns?
It prints -1.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 12/10/12 1:55 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 17:06, Dan wrote:
I think so. Here is a claim I think is true: gdup must do full deep copy
to be safe and guarantee the transitive const/immutable. If it is
implemented such that there are no casts, then the compiler does its job
and
On 12/10/12 2:07 PM, Dan wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 18:55:09 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I'm pretty sure it can't be done. For classes one need to bypass the
constructor. The constructor is the only place where you can
initialize const/immutable fields. For class instance one would
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 19:46:18 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/10/12 1:55 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 17:06, Dan wrote:
I think so. Here is a claim I think is true: gdup must do
full deep copy
to be safe and guarantee the transitive const/immutable. If
it is
On 2012-12-10 20:46, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Just like Dan I thought it can be done but actually ownership is
impossible to establish in general. Consider:
class List(T) {
List next;
T payload;
...
}
versus
class Window {
Window parent;
...
}
It's pretty obvious
On 2012-12-10 20:41, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Wouldn't this be the right time to put the D stable idea to work? Leave
UDA in master, but create a 2.061 release branch without UDA, and
release that.
I think it's the right time.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2012-12-10 20:55, Dan wrote:
You are correct. const or immutable fields won't work. But then, if you
had a field that was const or immutable you might as well make it
static. Any problems with gdup in that case would be the same you would
see if you wanted to implement your own.
As I wrote
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 19:40:52 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 20:37, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
You might have the same problem with structs. That is, if it's
possible
to have const/immutable files which are not initialized in the
declaration.
That should have been fields.
On Monday, December 10, 2012 11:41:29 H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 11:16:32PM -0800, 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
On Monday, December 10, 2012 13:30:39 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 12:07, Walter Bright wrote:
If someone wants to do the work to support them, I'll fold it in.
Same old, same old. I guess I have to do it myself if I want something done.
That's the way that it works with pretty much
On 12/9/12 10:58 PM, Nick B wrote:
[about the Disruptor framework]
Would Andrei like to comment on any of the comments so far ??
Sorry, I'd need to acquire expertise in Disruptor before discussing it.
I found http://disruptor.googlecode.com/files/Disruptor-1.0.pdf quite
difficult to get into
On Monday, December 10, 2012 13:34:19 monarch_dodra wrote:
On Friday, 7 December 2012 at 18:44:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Friday, December 07, 2012 18:18:43 monarch_dodra wrote:
I had actually been through this before, and someone told me
about that. The problem at this point is
On 12/10/12 2:54 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 20:46, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Just like Dan I thought it can be done but actually ownership is
impossible to establish in general. Consider:
class List(T) {
List next;
T payload;
...
}
versus
class Window {
Window parent;
...
}
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 12:46:19 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/7/2012 2:51 PM, deadalnix wrote:
I'm working on a program that now require more than 2.5Gb of
RAM to compile,
where separate compilation is not possible due to bug 8997 and
that randomly
fails to compile due to bug 8596.
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 20:10:25 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
You want to create a new window with the same parent. At the
top level there's one desktop window, and probably having two
would be odd.
Ok - so I'm only talking about structs.
What you say is what you want here and
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 01:58:30PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:45:06 -0800
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:34:13PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:10:42 -0800
Ellery Newcomer ellery-newco...@utulsa.edu
On 2012-12-10 21:04, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
That's the way that it works with pretty much everything around here. It's
just that there are more people working on D2 and its components than D1. In
either case, if no one else has the time or inclination to do what you want,
you have to do it.
On 2012-12-10 21:10, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
You want to create a new window with the same parent. At the top level
there's one desktop window, and probably having two would be odd.
There are many applications that support several top level windows.
These are mostly document based.
--
On 12/10/12 4:20 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 21:10, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
You want to create a new window with the same parent. At the top level
there's one desktop window, and probably having two would be odd.
There are many applications that support several top level
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 20:08:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/9/12 10:58 PM, Nick B wrote:
[about the Disruptor framework]
Would Andrei like to comment on any of the comments so far ??
Sorry, I'd need to acquire expertise in Disruptor before
discussing it. I found
On 12/10/2012 12:55 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I would think that others have interest in this as well. And it's not just for
D1, it's for D2 as well.
If that was the only thing others have interest in, then it would be top
priority. But there are endless why haven't you fixed xxx yet? issues.
On 12/10/2012 12:04 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Regardless, the UDA stuff can't be in the next release.
Why? (It's being heavily used by some people.)
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 12:57:43 -0800
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 01:58:30PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:45:06 -0800
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
'cos you're running with JS turned off. :-)
g
It makes
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 21:50:47 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Why? (It's being heavily used by some people.)
I'm *really* looking forward to UDAs in the next release. Even if
the syntax changes in 2.62, I'd still like to have it in 2.61
just because there's so many things I can do with
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 21:57:58 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 21:50:47 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
Why? (It's being heavily used by some people.)
I'm *really* looking forward to UDAs in the next release. Even
if the syntax changes in 2.62, I'd still like to
On 12/10/2012 1:57 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 21:50:47 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Why? (It's being heavily used by some people.)
I'm *really* looking forward to UDAs in the next release. Even if the syntax
changes in 2.62, I'd still like to have it in 2.61 just
10.12.2012 20:58, Alex Rønne Petersen пишет:
On 10-12-2012 10:04, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
06.12.2012 22:40, Alex Rønne Petersen пишет:
Hi,
I decided to take a stab at reviving the new std.process written by Lars
T. Kyllingstad and Steven Schveighoffer.
The result is here:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:54:52 +0100
Peter Alexander peter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 03:18:30 UTC, 1100110 wrote:
On 12/09/2012 08:10 PM, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
The whole process only takes 5-7 seconds here.
Only is not the right word to use here.
Yea,
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 22:15:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2012 1:57 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 21:50:47 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
Why? (It's being heavily used by some people.)
I'm *really* looking forward to UDAs in the next release. Even
if
On 10-12-2012 23:18, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
10.12.2012 20:58, Alex Rønne Petersen пишет:
On 10-12-2012 10:04, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
06.12.2012 22:40, Alex Rønne Petersen пишет:
Hi,
I decided to take a stab at reviving the new std.process written by
Lars
T. Kyllingstad and Steven
On 12/10/2012 05:16 AM, Mr. Anonymous wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 02:10:43 UTC, 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.
ddox* on dlang.org, anyone?
On 12/10/2012 04:20 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:54:52 +0100
Peter Alexanderpeter.alexander...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 03:18:30 UTC, 1100110 wrote:
On 12/09/2012 08:10 PM, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
The whole process only takes 5-7 seconds here.
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 21:24:09 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/10/12 4:20 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-12-10 21:10, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
You want to create a new window with the same parent. At the
top level
there's one desktop window, and probably having two would
On 12/10/2012 2:20 PM, Max Samukha wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 22:15:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2012 1:57 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 21:50:47 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Why? (It's being heavily used by some people.)
I'm *really* looking
On 12/10/2012 8:28 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
This was the result of DustMite-ing my sources:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6296
Currently the bug state is a bit confusing. It is a regression (but I didn't
mark it that way, only write in description, sorry) but is resolved as
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 20:08:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/9/12 10:58 PM, Nick B wrote:
[about the Disruptor framework]
Would Andrei like to comment on any of the comments so far ??
Sorry, I'd need to acquire expertise in Disruptor before
discussing it. I found
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 22:56:45 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2012 2:20 PM, Max Samukha wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 22:15:09 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 12/10/2012 1:57 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 21:50:47 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
Why?
On Monday, December 10, 2012 13:50:47 Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2012 12:04 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Regardless, the UDA stuff can't be in the next release.
Why? (It's being heavily used by some people.)
It hasn't even been properly worked out yet, and new features like that
On Monday, December 10, 2012 03:02:40 Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/9/2012 8:17 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Not to mention, unless you can find ways to implement everything that
you'd
need a postblit or copy constructor to do without them and get rid of
postblits, doing deep copies is going
Hello all,
Walter and I have had a long discussion following his trip to Australia.
Following the current sprint for Win64 (which we all, I think, agree was
long overdue and had to be done), the main area we need to work on (as
I'm sure many would agree) is improving our process, in
On 12/10/2012 3:35 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, December 10, 2012 13:50:47 Walter Bright wrote:
Why? (It's being heavily used by some people.)
It hasn't even been properly worked out yet, and new features like that
shouldn't be being introduced in the main branch. It's not at all
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 23:47:49 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
We've debated this feature at length in various threads. It's
under heavy use by some people. It does not break any existing
code. I don't see any unresolved issue that should delay its
incorporation.
We already have some
http://xtzgzorex.wordpress.com/2012/12/11/array-slices-and-interior-pointers/
Destroy.
--
Alex Rønne Petersen
a...@lycus.org
http://lycus.org
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 23:41:25 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Hello all,
Walter and I have had a long discussion following his trip to
Australia. Following the current sprint for Win64 (which we
all, I think, agree was long overdue and had to be done), the
main area we need to
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 06:41:25PM -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Hello all,
Walter and I have had a long discussion following his trip to
Australia. Following the current sprint for Win64 (which we all, I
think, agree was long overdue and had to be done), the main area we
need to work
On 11-12-2012 01:19, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 06:41:25PM -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Hello all,
Walter and I have had a long discussion following his trip to
Australia. Following the current sprint for Win64 (which we all, I
think, agree was long overdue and had to be
I fleshed out the wiki page on contributing to D, based on what I know:
http://wiki.dlang.org/Get_involved
But I think it needs at least another pair of eyes from other D
contributors to add missing details or fix blatant errors on my part.
It would be nice especially if
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 04:29:14PM -0800, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I fleshed out the wiki page on contributing to D, based on what I know:
http://wiki.dlang.org/Get_involved
But I think it needs at least another pair of eyes from other D
contributors to add missing details or fix blatant
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 23:41:25 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
(One piece that has been brought forward is
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ -
something to keep in mind.)
In this workflow, only one version of the software is produced.
But we have an extra
On 11-12-2012 01:30, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 04:29:14PM -0800, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I fleshed out the wiki page on contributing to D, based on what I know:
http://wiki.dlang.org/Get_involved
But I think it needs at least another pair of eyes from other D
contributors to
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 01:35:12AM +0100, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 11-12-2012 01:30, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 04:29:14PM -0800, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I fleshed out the wiki page on contributing to D, based on what I know:
http://wiki.dlang.org/Get_involved
But I
On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 16:46:19 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
wrote:
12/10/2012 8:12 AM, Mehrdad пишет:
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
On 12/11/2012 01:04 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
http://xtzgzorex.wordpress.com/2012/12/11/array-slices-and-interior-pointers/
Destroy.
Why does the internal representation have to be the same for a managed
port and native D? Also, how does the second representation work
exactly? Not
1 - 100 of 201 matches
Mail list logo
