On 11/1/13 9:06 PM, Manfred Nowak wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Bugs stopping Pegged from going forward should receive high priority.
One prerequisite for every PEG-Parser is, that the language has to be
designed to be without any ambiguity.
This is not the case for D, because of its evo
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Bugs stopping Pegged from going forward should receive high priority.
One prerequisite for every PEG-Parser is, that the language has to be
designed to be without any ambiguity.
This is not the case for D, because of its evolution based on recursive
descent parsing
On 11/1/2013 6:52 AM, Wyatt wrote:
"We could, for instance, begin with cleaning up our language by no longer
calling a bug a bug but by calling it an error. It is much more honest because
it squarely puts the blame where it belongs, viz. with the programmer who made
the error.
Although it is te
On 11/1/2013 8:03 AM, bearophile wrote:
Everyone who writes safety critical software should really avoid languages
unable to detect integral overflows (at compile-time or run-time) in all normal
numerical operations, and languages that have undefined operations in their
basic semantics.
So Ada l
eles:
Yeah, after the scope() statement, this is the thing that I'd
want the most in my C,
The latest versions of Clang are able to catch some integral
overflows at run-time. It is of course only a small part of the
whole amount of things needed to produce correct code, but for
high integri
On 11/1/13 2:12 PM, Dicebot wrote:
That makes me think probably Phobos should have a package.json so people
can install updates via code.dlang.org.
How would you imagine that? Not-yet-in-Phobos packages are expected to
be submitted as standalone ones, not as whole Phobos repo.
I meant people
On 11/1/13 1:59 PM, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
The examples directory shows different grammars, from JSON to XML to C to D.
I used it with the D grammar, but the one on the website is woefully
inadequate (some mistakes, out of date compared to the compiler and
written in a somewhat convoluted style
That makes me think probably Phobos should have a package.json
so people
can install updates via code.dlang.org.
How would you imagine that? Not-yet-in-Phobos packages are
expected to be submitted as standalone ones, not as whole Phobos
repo.
On 11/1/13 1:36 PM, Martin Nowak wrote:
I have another request despite putting this in it's own repo.
I assume s/despite/in addition to/ :o).
Often one want an exponentially (power of 2) growing step size for
Bucketizer. Currently only equally spaced buckets are possible which
isn't very prac
The examples directory shows different grammars, from JSON to XML to C to D.
I used it with the D grammar, but the one on the website is woefully
inadequate (some mistakes, out of date compared to the compiler and written
in a somewhat convoluted style full of left-recursion). The shortcomings
are
On 10/30/13 1:02 PM, Martin Nowak wrote:
This looks really promising.
There are a lot of building blocks and the way different capabilities
are modelled by optional methods nicely solves the biggest difficulty
with allocators.
I think it's important to put this in it's own github repo and add a d
On Friday, 1 November 2013 at 15:03:47 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
avoid languages unable to detect integral overflows (at
compile-time or run-time) in all normal numerical operations,
Yeah, after the scope() statement, this is the thing that I'd
want the most in my C, at least du
On Friday, 1 November 2013 at 13:52:01 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
On Thursday, 31 October 2013 at 21:36:11 UTC, eles wrote:
much more honest because it squarely puts the blame where it
belongs, viz. with the programmer who made the error. The
That's in an ideal world. When different people work on th
I have another request despite putting this in it's own repo.
Often one want an exponentially (power of 2) growing step size for
Bucketizer. Currently only equally spaced buckets are possible which
isn't very practical to scale from 16b to 2Mb.
http://erdani.com/d/phobos-prerelease/std_allocat
On 11/01/2013 03:34 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Added SharedFreelist, a lock-free freelist.
http://erdani.com/d/phobos-prerelease/std_allocator.html#.SharedFreelist
Andrei
Nice, that reminds me that I still want to polish my implementation of a
lock free doubly-linked list in D.
It woul
On 10/31/2013 07:10 AM, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
Now, if you want parsing specifically, what do you want to get? A parse
tree? In that case, you can for example use one of my projects, Pegged,
which generates CT-compatible parsers (that is, functions that can use
CTFE to parse a string at CT).
Pars
On Friday, 1 November 2013 at 17:21:07 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
The second one is the inout problem. Qualifier in output may
reflect
the one in inputs. inout solve this for some type qualifiers,
but
sometime is ambiguous and does nothing for the problem at
large.
I'm not sure what inout has to
Today, while playingly adding const annotations to std.bigint, I noticed
that I ended up with a few casts - or more specifically, assumeUniques.
Now, the interesting thing was the pattern they formed. Almost invariably,
it's like this:
BigUint foo() pure {
uint[] result;
Hey D Programmers,
so, we at Sociomantic Labs are once again (or still) looking for
D-Developers in Berlin. And lots of them. Currently still D1, but
the process to change to D2 is initiated.
You can read more about it here:
https://www.sociomantic.com/jobs/d-software-developer/#.UnPl4Xh385Y
On Friday, 1 November 2013 at 15:15:10 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Migrating the flags into the type is a possibility but maybe
it's easiest to add flags as runtime parameters.
I was using that as an example to argue for its inclusion because
it was concise.
I'm not sure what the best in
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:10:03PM +0100, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 10/31/2013 09:05 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
> >So, in a nutshell, my proposal is:
> >
> >- Functions that, besides invoking a delegate parameter, are pure,
> > should be allowed to be marked as pure.
> >
> >- Template functions tha
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 12:26:43AM +0100, deadalnix wrote:
> I think you take it the wrong way. Weak purity have some guarantee
> in itself, like you know it won't reach shared data unless you pass
> them explicitly, do not touch anything static, etc . . .
This still holds. Passing a delegate that
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 08:59:29PM +0400, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
> 01.11.2013 0:05, H. S. Teoh пишет:
[...]
> >So, in a nutshell, my proposal is:
> >
> >- Functions that, besides invoking a delegate parameter, are pure,
> > should be allowed to be marked as pure.
> >
> >- Template functions tha
01.11.2013 0:05, H. S. Teoh пишет:
[I actually came up with this idea last week, but decided to postpone
bringing it up until all the furor about Andrei's new allocator design
has settled a little. ;-)]
One of the neatest things about purity in D is that traditionally impure
operations like muta
2013/11/1 Timon Gehr
> On 11/01/2013 03:21 PM, Kenji Hara wrote:
>
>>
>> The first delegate should not become pure.
>>
>
> Why not? It is weakly pure, like the following:
>
> void main(){
> struct S{
> int num;
> void member(int x)pure{ num = x; } // pure
> }
> S s;
>
On Friday, 1 November 2013 at 13:52:01 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
On Thursday, 31 October 2013 at 21:36:11 UTC, eles wrote:
Yeah, maybe is a corporation culture to avoid the term "bug",
but we always use the term "change request". Maybe it has a
better image :)
Lately, I've instead been reframing my
On 10/31/13 8:37 PM, safety0ff wrote:
On Friday, 1 November 2013 at 02:43:00 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 10/31/13 7:26 PM, safety0ff wrote:
I noticed that the GCAllocator provides no way of controlling the memory
block attributes (http://dlang.org/phobos/core_memory.html#.GC.BlkAttr
,) a
Walter Bright:
...
Everyone who writes safety critical software should really avoid
languages unable to detect integral overflows (at compile-time or
run-time) in all normal numerical operations, and languages that
have undefined operations in their basic semantics.
So Ada language is OK,
Scintilla has lexer tests which work by marking up the output and
comparing with etalon string.
On 11/01/2013 03:21 PM, Kenji Hara wrote:
2013/11/1 Timon Gehr mailto:timon.g...@gmx.ch>>
On 11/01/2013 02:36 PM, Kenji Hara wrote:
I think this is a good discovery. Currently a pure function can have
lazy parameters and it is treated as a weakly pure function.
pure
2013/11/1 Timon Gehr
> On 11/01/2013 02:36 PM, Kenji Hara wrote:
>
>> I think this is a good discovery. Currently a pure function can have
>> lazy parameters and it is treated as a weakly pure function.
>>
>> pure int foo(lazy int x) { return x; } // OK
>>
>> We can think the lazy parameter is a
On 11/01/2013 02:36 PM, Kenji Hara wrote:
I think this is a good discovery. Currently a pure function can have
lazy parameters and it is treated as a weakly pure function.
pure int foo(lazy int x) { return x; } // OK
We can think the lazy parameter is a limited case of scope delegate
parameter
On 11/01/2013 01:43 PM, Wyatt wrote:
On Friday, 1 November 2013 at 11:45:23 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
return (y)pure=x=y;
Drifting off topic a little, but how does this expression work? I can't
recall having seen the (y)pure thing before.
-Wyatt
It is in a comment. The exact expression wo
I think this is a good discovery. Currently a pure function can have lazy
parameters and it is treated as a weakly pure function.
pure int foo(lazy int x) { return x; } // OK
We can think the lazy parameter is a limited case of scope delegate
parameter.
And more, I discovered that the purity ma
On 2013-11-01 12:56, Wyatt wrote:
I would classify forcing someone to use iTunes as "psychological
warfare". Unfortunately, that's not covered by the EULA. ;)
Then you're good to go :)
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Thursday, 31 October 2013 at 19:45:17 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 10/31/2013 7:57 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
You don't know how thankful I am for having learnt the concept
of
pumping the brakes, ABS or not. I'm afraid too many driving
instructors
nowadays just advise slamming the brakes and rely
On Friday, 1 November 2013 at 11:45:23 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
return (y)pure=x=y;
Drifting off topic a little, but how does this expression work?
I can't recall having seen the (y)pure thing before.
-Wyatt
On Thursday, 31 October 2013 at 22:20:23 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
I'm not sure. Excerpt from the iTunes EULA:
"You also agree that you will not use these products for any
purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without
limitation, the development, design, manufacture or production
On 11/01/2013 12:45 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
auto a=bar(); // note: a is pure
(as in 'weakly pure'.)
On 11/01/2013 12:26 AM, deadalnix wrote:
I think you take it the wrong way. Weak purity have some guarantee in
itself, like you know it won't reach shared data
I assume you mean mutable shared data.
unless you pass them explicitly, do not touch anything static,
Unless you pass it in explici
On 2013-10-31 22:47, Timothee Cour wrote:
$ is another obvious choice (eg in shell expansion)
but # could also be good as it's very much unused in D.
Yeah, # is only used for #line, which should be less common than $.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2013-10-31 23:20, Timon Gehr wrote:
I'm not sure. Excerpt from the iTunes EULA:
"You also agree that you will not use these products for any purposes
prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the
development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or
ch
42 matches
Mail list logo
