On Thu, 02 May 2013 23:22:01 -0700, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Oh, and if it's not too late. Make sure there are microphones for the
audience for the questions. If that's not available, it's important that
the speaker (or someone) repeats the questions for the recording. Hurb
Sutter is really g
On 2013-05-03 01:59, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I'll answer community questions in my last talk at DConf 2013, which is
about 24 hours from now. Please send yours here or on Twitter #dconf.
Could you say something about the general development process of D, how
the future of that looks like.
On Thursday, 2 May 2013 at 23:59:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
I'll answer community questions in my last talk at DConf 2013,
which is about 24 hours from now. Please send yours here or on
Twitter #dconf.
Andrei
What are the plans regarding "functional part" of the language?
1) It seem
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Joseph Cassman wrote:
> If you could provide an update on the allocators design and implementation
> -- progress and/or roadmap -- that would be great. Also if there are any
> plans to update std.container as a result.
>
+1
And another one. I am working on an emb
On Thursday, 2 May 2013 at 23:59:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
I'll answer community questions in my last talk at DConf 2013,
which is about 24 hours from now. Please send yours here or on
Twitter #dconf.
Andrei
If you could provide an update on the allocators design and
implementation
I'll answer community questions in my last talk at DConf 2013, which is
about 24 hours from now. Please send yours here or on Twitter #dconf.
Andrei
On Thursday, 2 May 2013 at 16:44:44 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
(at moments it feels like you have to take a degree to learn
how to use it effectively...)
That or buy the documentation. Or both...
Am Thu, 02 May 2013 18:54:28 +0200
schrieb "Timofei Bolshakov" :
> Thank you!
> I will check that today. What to do about static asserts in
> thread.d?
Those should be fixed by the ucontext changes. The
static if(__traits( compiles, ucontext_t )) code path
will be used if we make ucontext_t avai
On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 17:44 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
[…]
> To be honest, that's one of the reasons that put me off working with
> ANLTR. It seems easy to create a parser with ANTLR, but to create an
> efficient, well-behaved parser it looks quite complicated, in the sense
> that you can't ab
Thank you!
I will check that today. What to do about static asserts in
thread.d?
On Thursday, 2 May 2013 at 14:54:44 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:40:32 +0200
schrieb "Timofei Bolshakoc" :
I was able to compile DGC to the Hello, World status for ARM
using crosstools-ng 1.1
On 26/04/2013 21:44, Brian Schott wrote:
On Saturday, 20 April 2013 at 08:31:34 UTC, Brian Schott wrote:
This uses ANTLR, as the other parser generators can't handle D's grammar.
I'm beginning to think that ANTRL is not up to the task either. I've
somehow managed to get the grammar to the poin
On Thursday, 2 May 2013 at 08:18:48 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 April 2013 at 22:36:44 UTC, Brian Schott wrote:
I realize that it was left in to make C programmers happy
I remember being mentioned by someone that it is more about
simplifying porting of C headers to D than actually maki
Am Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:40:32 +0200
schrieb "Timofei Bolshakoc" :
> I was able to compile DGC to the Hello, World status for ARM
> using crosstools-ng 1.18 eglibc. uclibc would not work, it lack
> some of the functions in the library, context switching. There
> are several places I cheat ( to ge
To: NG D
Subject: Re: To help LDC/GDC
This D code comes from a Haskell solution by tanakh of the
Lawnmower problem of the Google Code Jam 2013 Qualification Round:
import std.stdio, std.string, std.conv, std.range, std.algorithm;
void main() {
immutable n = stdin.readln.strip.to!int;
fo
On Tuesday, 30 April 2013 at 22:36:44 UTC, Brian Schott wrote:
I realize that it was left in to make C programmers happy
I remember being mentioned by someone that it is more about
simplifying porting of C headers to D than actually making C
programmers happy.
On Tuesday, 30 April 2013 at 22:36:44 UTC, Brian Schott wrote:
I realize that it was left in to make C programmers happy
I remember being mentioned by someone that it is more about
simplifying porting of C headers to D than actually making C
programmers happy.
Brian Schott:
It complicates the grammar and doesn't fit with D's style of
declaraing variables. (type then identifier)
I suggested something more moderate: to just disallow mixing C
and D syntax in the same declaration:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5807
I realize that it
17 matches
Mail list logo
