On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 05:44:16 UTC, Rob T wrote:
One issue I immediately ran into, is when I run bub incorrectly
it hangs after writing the bail message to console. ctrl-c
does not kill it, and I have to run a process kill commandto
terminate.
CTRL-Z works for me. I think it expects
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 21:15:34 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Jun 26, 2013 9:00 PM, Joakim joa...@airpost.net wrote:
This is flat wrong. I suggest you read the Artistic license,
it was
chosen for a reason, ie it allows closing of source as long as
you provide
the original, unmodified
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 07:32:32 UTC, eles wrote:
CTRL-Z works for me. I think it expects input.
Ignore it. It just suspends it.
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 03:20:37 UTC, Mathias Lang wrote:
I've read (almost), everything, so I hope I won't miss a point
here:
a) I've heard about MSVC, Red Hat, Qt, Linux and so on. From my
understanding, none of the projects mentionned have gone from
free (as in
free beer) to
Hm, bub.. Sounds like it should work with 'dub' nicely ;)
Looks promising and I'd really love to see some build tool other
then rdmd getting to the point it can be called standard.
Makefile's sometimes are just too inconvenient.
On 27 June 2013 09:21, Joakim joa...@airpost.net wrote:
But lets assume that you are right and the optimization patches I'm talking
about would tend to end up only in the backend. In that case, the frontend
would not have any closed patches and the paid version of dmd would simply
have a
On 27 June 2013 09:53, Joakim joa...@airpost.net wrote:
those involved with the D compiler can decide if this would be a worthwhile
direction. From their silence so far, I can only assume that they are not
interested in rousing the ire of the freetards and will simply maintain the
status quo
Joakim, el 26 de June a las 17:52 me escribiste:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 11:08:17 UTC, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Joakim, el 25 de June a las 23:37 me escribiste:
I don't know the views of the key contributors, but I wonder if
they
would have such a knee-jerk reaction against any
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 08:21:12 UTC, Joakim wrote:
I'm familiar with its arguments from a summary, not
particularly interested in reading the whole thing.
You know, I think I see what your problem is ... :-)
As I said earlier, I'm done with this debate.
There is no point talking to people who make blatantly ignorant
statements like, Binary blobs are the exception rather than the
rule in Linux, and many hardware vendors would flat out say 'no'
to doing any support on them. This assertion is so
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 13:18:01 UTC, Joakim wrote:
As I said earlier, I'm done with this debate.
There is no point talking to people who make blatantly ignorant
statements like, Binary blobs are the exception rather than
the rule in Linux, and many hardware vendors would flat out say
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 13:18:01 UTC, Joakim wrote:
There is no point talking to people who make blatantly ignorant
statements
Yeah, I keep wondering why someone even bothered to waste time
explaining all this to someone who is incapable of both providing
own reasoning and studying
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 13:25:06 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 13:18:01 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Look, I get it, you guys are religious zealots- you tip your
hand when you allude to ethical or moral reasons for using
open source, a crazy idea if there ever was one- and
On 27 June 2013 14:40, Joakim joa...@airpost.net wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 13:25:06 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 13:18:01 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Look, I get it, you guys are religious zealots- you tip your hand when
you allude to ethical or moral reasons for
On 6/26/13 5:10 PM, Graham St Jack wrote:
Bottom-up-build (bub) is a build system written in D which supports
building of large C/C++/D projects.
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1h6p2w/bottomupbuild_a_build_system_for_ccd/
Andrei
Andrei Alexandrescu:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1fpw2r/dconf_2013_day_2_talk_5_a_precise_garbage/
Another thing to keep in account while designing a more precise
garbage collection is a possible special casing for Algebraic
(and Variant, and more generally for some
On 27 June 2013 14:17, Joakim joa...@airpost.net wrote:
As I said earlier, I'm done with this debate.
There is no point talking to people who make blatantly ignorant statements
like, Binary blobs are the exception rather than the rule in Linux, and
many hardware vendors would flat out say
-You could start taking donations and hire some people to work on
D.
This doesn't work as it's a volunteer project. Why should someone
get paid when others give their time for free? It would create
conflict while being a less effective application of funds, D
already gets more than one or
On 6/27/13, ixid nuacco...@gmail.com wrote:
-You could start taking donations and hire some people to work on
A better use of the money is another D conference which has
been a huge success and generated both ideas and much greater
interest and exposure for D.
Yes, and some better glue for the
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 07:44:07 +0200, Rob T wrote:
This build system seems to be very well suited for building complex
large projects in a sensible way.
I successfully tested the example build on Debian linux. I will
definitely explore this further using one of my own projects.
One issue I
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 21:39:28 UTC, ixid wrote:
-You could start taking donations and hire some people to work
on
D.
This doesn't work as it's a volunteer project. Why should
someone get paid when others give their time for free? It would
create conflict while being a less effective
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 13:58:18 -0700
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
Actually, my first introduction to programming was the interactive
tutorial disks that came with the Apple IIc. I sometimes find it
kind of depressing that instruction isn't even *that* far along
anymore, let
On 6/26/13 8:05 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
If you are the type of programmer who often tests their own code, why
are you passing more arguments than needed to format?
My point is they're needed.
Andrei
On 6/26/13 10:35 PM, Peter Williams wrote:
On 27/06/13 14:20, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 01:56:31PM +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
[...]
While you're fixing it can you modify it so that the format string
can specify the order in which the arguments are replaced? This is
very
On 6/26/13 8:26 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
The way I see it, write/writef is primarily used for debugging and
benefits having some lax features, whereas format is used in more
heavy-duty work where it's important not to screw things up at the
call site.
Then I think all the more format should
On 6/26/13 8:36 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 19:18:27 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 6/26/13 1:50 PM, bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Actually this is good because it allows to customize the format string
to print only a subset of available information (I've
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 23:49:41 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The only point I'd negotiate would be to not throw with positional
arguments, and throw with sequential arguments. All code that cares uses
positional specifiers anyway.
That sounds like a good compromise.
- Jonathan M Davis
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 23:47:15 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
That
behavour is surprising, and it risks hiding some information silently.
Doesn't surprise me one bit.
Well, it shocks most of us.
I'm also not moved by argumentum ad populum.
ad populum obviously isn't enough. But
On 6/26/13 11:59 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 23:47:15 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
That
behavour is surprising, and it risks hiding some information silently.
Doesn't surprise me one bit.
Well, it shocks most of us.
I'm also not moved by argumentum ad populum.
On 6/26/13 11:59 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I'm just pointing out that ignoring what the majority
thinks is not necessarily a good idea.
Of course. In this case it is.
Andrei
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 02:25:54 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 6/26/13 2:47 PM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 26.06.2013 20:52, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 08:08:08PM +0200, bearophile wrote:
An interesting blog post found through Reddit:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 22:56:41 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/26/2013 2:47 PM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
I have been an adept of iostreams since day one and never
understood why people
complain so much about them or the operator and operator
for that matter.
Even if you can get past the
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 06:59:49 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
ad populum obviously isn't enough. But if we make a design
decision that
favors 1% of our user base and causes problems for the other
99%, then I think
that we've made a big mistake. And while having most everyone
disagree with
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 22:04:39 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:47:32PM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 26.06.2013 20:52, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
[...]
None of my C++ code uses iostream. I still find stdio.h more
comfortable to use, in spite of its many problems. One of the
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 07:33:16 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 22:56:41 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/26/2013 2:47 PM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
I have been an adept of iostreams since day one and never
understood why people
complain so much about them or the operator
On 6/21/2013 4:10 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Except not everyone has the authorization to place their work code in such
public places nor the availability or desire to code after work, just to please
job interviewers.
True, but your odds of being 'discovered' go up enormously if you make such an
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 02:17:09 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 6/26/13 1:31 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 6/26/13, Andrei Alexandrescuseewebsiteforem...@erdani.org
wrote:
Actually this is good because it allows to customize the
format string
to print only a subset of available
On Thursday, 30 May 2013 at 11:29:47 UTC, Manu wrote:
Have you ever worked on code written by people who barely speak
English?
I did. It's better than having a mixture of languages like here:
http://code.google.com/p/trileri/source/browse/trunk/tr/yazi.d
assert(length == dizgi.length); - in
On Tuesday, 28 May 2013 at 00:11:18 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Every time I've been to a programming shop in a foreign
country, the developers speak english at work and code in
english. Of course, that doesn't mean that everyone does, but
as far as I can tell the overwhelming bulk is done in
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 18:08:10 UTC, bearophile wrote:
[cut]
The most common problem they find are errors in the format
string of printf-like functions (despite the code is C++):
The top type of bug that /analyze finds is format string errors
– mismatches between printf-style format
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 20:50:03 UTC, bearophile wrote:
If you want a special behavour you should use a special
function as partialWritefln that ignores arguments not present
in the format string.
Or maybe just define a new format specifier (%z, for 'zap'?) to
ignore one or more
Jonathan M Davis:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
The only point I'd negotiate would be to not throw with
positional arguments, and throw with sequential arguments.
All code that cares uses positional specifiers anyway.
That sounds like a good compromise.
OK :-)
Bye,
bearophile
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 06:59:49 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
But if we make a design decision that favors 1% of our userbase
I really think we all need to be more careful about these kinds
of statements. I often see posts on the newsgroup where someone
says feature/function X is
On 2013-06-27 07:35, Timothee Cour wrote:
See [1][2] for related thread introducing extern(objective C)
A)
The syntax proposed in [2] transforms:
-(void) insertItemWithObjectValue: (NSString *) path atGreen:(NSInteger)
anInt;
[obj insertItemWithObjectValue:val atGreen:idx ];
into:
void
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 05:35:28 UTC, Timothee Cour wrote:
See [1][2] for related thread introducing extern(objective C)
A)
The syntax proposed in [2] transforms:
-(void) insertItemWithObjectValue: (NSString *) path
atGreen:(NSInteger)
anInt;
[obj insertItemWithObjectValue:val
On 6/27/13, Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
NO! This is exactly the kind of code that is buggy and useless. The
right use cases involve more arguments than format specifiers.
I mistyped that, I meant:
format(%s, 1, 2); // no exceptions in future release
safeFormat(%s,
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 13:11:55 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I mistyped that, I meant:
format(%s, 1, 2); // no exceptions in future release
safeFormat(%s, 1, 2); // exception thrown
I think if there's going to be a new function anyway, it might as
well be more like the ctFormat
On 6/27/13, Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/27/13, Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
NO! This is exactly the kind of code that is buggy and useless. The
right use cases involve more arguments than format specifiers.
I mistyped that, I meant:
On 6/27/13, Adam D. Ruppe destructiona...@gmail.com wrote:
I think if there's going to be a new function anyway, it might as
well be more like the ctFormat bearophile mentioned, and check it
at compile time.
Yeah but it's not always possible to know what the formatting string
is. For example,
Andrej Mitrovic:
Yeah but it's not always possible to know what the formatting
string
is. For example, maybe you have an enum array of format strings
but a
runtime index into this array which you pass to format at
runtime.
I've ported C samples before that used this style of formatting.
In
On 2013-06-27 05:35:11 +, Timothee Cour thelastmamm...@gmail.com said:
See [1][2] for related thread introducing extern(objective C)
A)
The syntax proposed in [2] transforms:
-(void) insertItemWithObjectValue: (NSString *) path atGreen:(NSInteger)
anInt;
[obj insertItemWithObjectValue:val
On 06/27/13 13:16, Nicolas Sicard wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 20:50:03 UTC, bearophile wrote:
If you want a special behavour you should use a special function as
partialWritefln that ignores arguments not present in the format string.
Or maybe just define a new format specifier
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 23:59:01 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 23:02:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Maybe a type distinction akin to C++'s auto_ptr might help?
It might not be so bad if we modified D to add a lent storage
class, or something, similar to some
(This is an extended repost of a message that I have put in
D.learn.)
Sometimes I have code like this:
struct VeryLongNamedStruct {}
void foo(in VeryLongNamedStruct x = VeryLongNamedStruct(1)) {}
void main() {}
Or even:
void bar(in TupleFoo x = TupleFoo(TupleBar(2), TupleSpam(3))) {}
In
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 17:42:14 UTC, bearophile wrote:
(This is an extended repost of a message that I have put in
D.learn.)
Sometimes I have code like this:
struct VeryLongNamedStruct {}
void foo(in VeryLongNamedStruct x = VeryLongNamedStruct(1)) {}
void main() {}
Or even:
void
Andrei Alexandrescu:
But the bottom line is I don't think we need to force anything
on anybody. If anything, we could split up the internal format
implementation and provide format and safeFormat functions.
format(%s %s, 1); // no exceptions
NO! This is exactly the kind of code that is
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 19:22:08 UTC, bearophile wrote:
(also why is it 1-based?):
It is specified that way in the Single Unix Specification for
format strings.
I'm not sure why they did it that way, but if we changed it, that
would be surprising since the format string is otherwise
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 13:47:53 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 06:59:49 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
But if we make a design decision that favors 1% of our userbase
I really think we all need to be more careful about these kinds
of statements. I often see posts on the
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 04:15:27 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Anything else is just the formula for endless frustration,
untraceable
bugs, and project failure. If your IDE's build function doesn't
support
full end-to-end reproducible builds, it's worthless and should
be
thrown out.
The IDE's
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 19:58:58 +0200
Maxim Fomin ma...@maxim-fomin.ru wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 17:42:14 UTC, bearophile wrote:
(This is an extended repost of a message that I have put in
D.learn.)
Sometimes I have code like this:
struct VeryLongNamedStruct {}
void foo(in
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:20:59PM +0200, Idan Arye wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 04:15:27 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Anything else is just the formula for endless frustration,
untraceable bugs, and project failure. If your IDE's build function
doesn't support full end-to-end reproducible
On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 06:27:34 +0200
QAston qas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 12:16:54 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Which lead to TITMOD, test in the middle of dev.
You should write a book on that, it'd be a total paradigm shift
for the non-yet-believers of TITMOD.
The
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:15:50 +0200
Szymon Gatner noem...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, 19 June 2013 at 21:59:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
I _do_ agree with writing the tests fora function as soon as
the function is
done, in which case, you're likely going to have to do more
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 03:47:39 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
That's _very_ dependent on what the function does. A prime
counter-example
would be overloaded operators like opBinary which uses their
string template
arguments in mixins within the function, thereby generating
completely
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 20:43:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
clip
That's something I never really understood about the Windows /
GUI
world. The backend functionality is already all there, yet for
some
strange reason the application refuses to have the means to
access that
functionality,
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 20:43:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
That's something I never really understood about the Windows /
GUI
world. The backend functionality is already all there, yet for
some
strange reason the application refuses to have the means to
access that
functionality, requiring
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:48:15PM +0200, Idan Arye wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 20:43:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
That's something I never really understood about the Windows / GUI
world. The backend functionality is already all there, yet for some
strange reason the application refuses
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 21:56:00 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:48:15PM +0200, Idan Arye wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 20:43:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
That's something I never really understood about the Windows
/ GUI
world. The backend functionality is already
On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 22:22:09 UTC, cybervadim wrote:
I know Andrey mentioned he was going to work on Allocators a
year ago. In DConf 2013 he described the problems he needs to
solve with Allocators. But I wonder if I am missing the
discussion around that - I tried searching this forum,
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 22:12:49 UTC, Nick B wrote:
On Sunday, 23 June 2013 at 15:22:22 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-06-23 15:12, qznc wrote:
That would be SystemTap on Linux. However, I wonder if it is
the right
tool for the job.
[snip]
here is a comparion of Systemtap and
On 27/06/13 23:33, bearophile wrote:
Andrej Mitrovic:
Yeah but it's not always possible to know what the formatting string
is. For example, maybe you have an enum array of format strings but a
runtime index into this array which you pass to format at runtime.
I've ported C samples before that
Would it be possible for a language(specifically d) to have the
ability to automatically type a variable by looking at its use
cases without adding too much complexity? It seems to me that
most compilers already can infer type mismatchs which would allow
them to handle stuff like:
main()
{
On 28/06/13 05:52, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 13:47:53 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 06:59:49 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
But if we make a design decision that favors 1% of our userbase
I really think we all need to be more careful about these
I believe it would be possible. D does something similar for auto
return values on functions already. Might be a bit of work in
the compiler though.
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 20:34:53 -0400, JS js.m...@gmail.com wrote:
Would it be possible for a language(specifically d) to have the ability
to automatically type a variable by looking at its use cases without
adding too much complexity? It seems to me that most compilers already
can infer type
JS:
in this case x and y's type is inferred from future use. The
compiler essentially just lazily infers the variable type.
Obviously ambiguity will generate an error.
Do you mean the flow-sensitive typing of the Whiley language?
http://whiley.org/guide/typing/flow-typing/
It's surely
I have successfully link c++ with D.
Have ever when I create a dependency:
cpp2-cpp1-d
when compile with dmd
dmd cpp1.a cpp2.a file.d -L-lstdc++
It compiles but when I run it I get
relocation error: some path: symbol _ZNSsC1EPKcRKSaIcE, version
GLIBCXX_3.4 not defined in file libstdc++.so.6
On Friday, 28 June 2013 at 01:12:11 UTC, Milvakili wrote:
relocation error: some path: symbol _ZNSsC1EPKcRKSaIcE,
version GLIBCXX_3.4 not defined in file libstdc++.so.6 with
link time reference
did you compile the C++ and run the program on the same computer?
This is complaining that it
On Friday, 28 June 2013 at 01:39:49 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 28 June 2013 at 01:12:11 UTC, Milvakili wrote:
relocation error: some path: symbol _ZNSsC1EPKcRKSaIcE,
version GLIBCXX_3.4 not defined in file libstdc++.so.6 with
link time reference
did you compile the C++ and run the
On Friday, June 28, 2013 10:44:36 Peter Williams wrote:
On 28/06/13 05:52, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 13:47:53 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 06:59:49 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
But if we make a design decision that favors 1% of our userbase
On Friday, 28 June 2013 at 01:42:35 UTC, Milvakili wrote:
On Friday, 28 June 2013 at 01:39:49 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 28 June 2013 at 01:12:11 UTC, Milvakili wrote:
relocation error: some path: symbol _ZNSsC1EPKcRKSaIcE,
version GLIBCXX_3.4 not defined in file libstdc++.so.6 with
On 06/27/2013 10:12 PM, Milvakili wrote:
I have successfully link c++ with D.
Have ever when I create a dependency:
cpp2-cpp1-d
when compile with dmd
dmd cpp1.a cpp2.a file.d -L-lstdc++
I tried it and it works _perfectly_ for me, but instead of .a I
compiled the C++ files to .o
On 28/06/13 11:47, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, June 28, 2013 10:44:36 Peter Williams wrote:
On 28/06/13 05:52, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 13:47:53 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 06:59:49 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
But if we make a design
On Friday, 28 June 2013 at 02:34:01 UTC, Juan Manuel Cabo wrote:
On 06/27/2013 10:12 PM, Milvakili wrote:
I have successfully link c++ with D.
Have ever when I create a dependency:
cpp2-cpp1-d
when compile with dmd
dmd cpp1.a cpp2.a file.d -L-lstdc++
I tried it and it works _perfectly_ for
I'd like to stack-allocate an array that will be dynamically
sized. Is alloca somewhere in the standard D library? If so, what
should I import to have access to it?
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 20:24:46 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
but auto can be used in paramenters too.
It can? Cool!
Actually I meant dmd does not support the feature now, but I see
no reason for not supporting it.
On 6/27/13 9:42 PM, Maxime Chevalier-Boisvert wrote:
I'd like to stack-allocate an array that will be dynamically sized. Is
alloca somewhere in the standard D library? If so, what should I import
to have access to it?
Yah, import core.stdc.stdlib.
Andrei
You're right. I didn't read over the OP's example carefully
enough. The
mutation is being done to a module-level variable in an inout
function, which
is completely legit. I thought that what the OP thought was
wrong was mutating
a module-level variable in a non-mutable function (and that's
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 21:00:42 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 20:51:35 UTC, Gary Willoughby
wrote:
Just for a bit of fun, I saw this question posted on reddit
the other day and wondered how *you* would solve this in D?
Since they didn't say *pure* function,
Sometimes I have code like this:
struct VeryLongNamedStruct {}
void foo(in VeryLongNamedStruct x = VeryLongNamedStruct(1)) {}
void main() {}
Or even:
void bar(in TupleFoo x = TupleFoo(TupleBar(2), TupleSpam(3))) {}
So is it a good idea to allow auto in the function signature
for the
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 20:51:35 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
Just for a bit of fun, I saw this question posted on reddit the
other day and wondered how *you* would solve this in D?
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/731832/interview-question-ffn-n
The question is ambiguous as to what
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 12:38:25 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
Woops, sorry missed an assert
unittest
{
assert(f(f(int.min)) == -(cast(long)int.min));
foreach(int n; int.min + 1 .. int.max)
{
assert(f(f(n)) == -n);
}
assert(f(f(int.max)) ==
On 6/27/13, bearophile bearophileh...@lycos.com wrote:
So is it a good idea to allow auto in the function signature
for the arguments that have a default value?
void foo(in auto x = VeryLongNamedStruct(1)) {}
I've wanted this too once. Although there's a tradeoff here, now the
user has to
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 23:14:09 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I think the 4-cycle algorithm is
probably still the best one I've seen.
All (correct) mathematically based answers are 4-cycle.
begin very sloppy proof with mixed up notation:
Let f^2(x) = -x
f^4(x) = f^2(f^2(x))
= f^2(-x)
Andrej Mitrovic:
On the other hand it could be useful in non-public and generic
code.
Do you have a realistic use case for generic code?
Bye,
bearophile
On 6/27/13, bearophile bearophileh...@lycos.com wrote:
On the other hand it could be useful in non-public and generic
code.
Do you have a realistic use case for generic code?
No, I'm just speaking out loud about the possibility.
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 12:38:25 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
The question is ambiguous as to what they mean by -n. Do they
mean the result of negation on the 32bit signed int, or do they
mean the negative of the number represented by that int. this
matters because -int.min evaluates to
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 15:32:05 UTC, MattCodr wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 12:38:25 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
The question is ambiguous as to what they mean by -n. Do they
mean the result of negation on the 32bit signed int, or do
they mean the negative of the number represented by
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 16:02:59 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 15:32:05 UTC, MattCodr wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 12:38:25 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
The question is ambiguous as to what they mean by -n. Do they
mean the result of negation on the 32bit signed
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 04:09:39 -0400, monarch_dodra monarchdo...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 21:00:42 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 20:51:35 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
Just for a bit of fun, I saw this question posted on reddit the other
day and
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
