On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 08:28:14AM +0100, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On 09/12/13 20:45, Araq wrote:
> >That language X is faster than C in "practice" because X is much more
> >developer friendly and thus you can tweak your code much easier etc.
> >is an argument of every language out there.
>
On 12/9/2013 11:55 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Agree with your points, but just had to point out that I don't even
*use* the mouse (well, barely), so your example is moot. :-P
A vi user? :-)
On 12/10/2013 12:21 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Result? The D version now runs faster than the C version -- perhaps up
to an order of magnitude.
This case history would make a great blog post.
On 10 December 2013 08:29, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/9/2013 11:55 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>
>> Agree with your points, but just had to point out that I don't even
>> *use* the mouse (well, barely), so your example is moot. :-P
>
>
> A vi user? :-)
>
Worse, he's from the emacs crowd. :o)
On 10/12/13 09:21, H. S. Teoh wrote:
It turned out that I had overlooked a simple but very significant
optimization present in the C version that hadn't been implemented
in the D version yet. [...] In the original C code, it took quite
a while to implement this optimization because ... well, in
On 12/09/2013 11:00 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/9/2013 1:28 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Sorry, I'm lost. What point are you arguing? None of this disputes in
any way
anything I wrote.
I thought you were arguing that whole program analysis was as good as
using immutable and const qualifiers.
Ind
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 08:28:12 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2013 12:21 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Result? The D version now runs faster than the C version --
perhaps up
to an order of magnitude.
This case history would make a great blog post.
+1. My opinion _might_ be just a tad
On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 12:06 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
[…]
I have been waiting to answer this as I wanted to do some experiment
first. However circumstances mean that this playing will have to wait
till the Christmas break. I thought I should put a place holder message
in though to mark that a re
Since it is not your (no-one specifically) job to do so and you
are probably not as `expert', it is likely that you will mess
things up. It is also time consuming ... The concept of "division
of labour" has been around for several thousand years, after all.
C++, R, MATLAB, and the like have real
Thank you ... load of my mind
(This post is a second try of the ideas I discussed in this ER:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5906 )
It is sometimes handy and useful to be able to give structs some
of the capabilities and qualities of some build-in values, this
makes structs more powerful, handy and allow to b
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 08:59:26AM +, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 10 December 2013 08:29, Walter Bright wrote:
> > On 12/9/2013 11:55 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >>
> >> Agree with your points, but just had to point out that I don't even
> >> *use* the mouse (well, barely), so your example is moot. :-
On Thursday, 5 December 2013 at 08:06:35 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
Having read all that though, one could argue that having "uni"
is *even worst* than "unicode", as it violates both:
a) Use the ® symbol to indicate that the Unicode Mark
b) Do not alter its spelling
I don't care much about uni v
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 15:09:37 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 08:59:26AM +, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 10 December 2013 08:29, Walter Bright
wrote:
> On 12/9/2013 11:55 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>
>> Agree with your points, but just had to point out that I
>> don't even
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:38:42AM +0100, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On 10/12/13 09:21, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >It turned out that I had overlooked a simple but very significant
> >optimization present in the C version that hadn't been implemented
> >in the D version yet. [...] In the original C
"Joseph Rushton Wakeling" wrote in message
news:mailman.307.1386345047.3242.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
> On 06/12/13 16:37, Daniel Murphy wrote:
>
> Is there a documented TODO list anywhere? And is there anything that
> those of us not contributing frontend code can do to help? (No, not
>
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 07:51:56 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
We need to work on the "compiler as a library" project.
I hope everyone agrees on this. My wild guess is that the project
will be the next "big thing" to work on after the frontend is
moved to D.
"Francesco Cattoglio" wrote in message
news:stpuvkzasctgyoryu...@forum.dlang.org...
> On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 07:51:56 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> We need to work on the "compiler as a library" project.
>
> I hope everyone agrees on this. My wild guess is that the project will be
> the nex
On 09/12/13 21:22, bachmeier wrote:
I will write something up as soon as I can, but it might be a while before that
happens. I will also share my code for the .Call interface. Hopefully I will get
feedback from someone more knowledgeable about D.
I'll leave DConf to the experts. I'm an economist
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he mentioned
the usefulness of the Option type - a zero or one element collection
(range in D terminology). Here's an article discussing it:
http://danielwestheide.com/blog/2012/12/19/the-neophytes-guide-to-scala-part-5-the-option-type.
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
We have only(x) (http://dlang.org/phobos/std_range.html#.only)
to be a collection of exactly one value, but not a type for "a
value of type T or nothing at all".
Is this not what Nullable!T is?
On 2013-12-10 17:28:26 +, Andrei Alexandrescu said:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he
mentioned the usefulness of the Option type - a zero or one element
collection (range in D terminology). Here's an article discussing it:
http://danielwestheide.com/blog/2012/
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he
mentioned the usefulness of the Option type - a zero or one
element collection (range in D terminology). Here's an article
discussing it:
http://danielwesthei
http://adamralph.com/2013/12/06/ndc-diary-day-3/?1
Better explanations:
http://damieng.com/blog/2013/12/09/probable-c-6-0-features-illustrated
Bye,
bearophile
On 12/10/13 9:47 AM, Max Klyga wrote:
On 2013-12-10 17:28:26 +, Andrei Alexandrescu said:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he
mentioned the usefulness of the Option type - a zero or one element
collection (range in D terminology). Here's an article discussing it:
On 12/10/13 9:40 AM, JR wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
We have only(x) (http://dlang.org/phobos/std_range.html#.only) to be a
collection of exactly one value, but not a type for "a value of type T
or nothing at all".
Is this not what Nullable!T
Am 10.12.2013 18:54, schrieb Yota:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he
mentioned the usefulness of the Option type - a zero or one element
collection (range in D terminology). Here's an article di
On 12/10/2013 1:58 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Recovering all immutable and const qualifiers that are possible to
assign to the program is simple to do if the whole program is available.
I believe you are seriously mistaken about it being simple, or even possible.
For example, malloc() returns a poi
On 12/10/13 10:21 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 10.12.2013 18:54, schrieb Yota:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he
mentioned the usefulness of the Option type - a zero or one element
collection (ran
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Should we follow Scala's example and add it?
Making an Option a D Range means it becomes a Mondad :-) There's
then a need for more awareness of Option!T in map/filter/zip.
Related:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9086
Bye,
bearophile
This morning I decided to use 2.0.64 (well actually, git HEAD) to
recompile a project that's been on the backburner for a while, and at
first it appeared as though a regression has occurred, as dmd spewed out
a screenful of compile errors.
Upon closer inspection, though, the errors were caused by
H. S. Teoh:
So this isn't a regression; it's *pro*gression!
(And on that note, I'd like to propose that code breakage of
this sort
*should* be allowed in D. While we *should* be stabilizing the
language,
I don't think it's right to go to the opposite extreme of
hindering
language fixes just
Am 10.12.2013 19:34, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:
On 12/10/13 10:21 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 10.12.2013 18:54, schrieb Yota:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he
mentioned the usefulness of the
Maybe it would be possible to get some good idea from next
version of C#
It's only ideas about next version, but new future maybe next:
http://damieng.com/blog/2013/12/09/probable-c-6-0-features-illustrated
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
We have only(x) (http://dlang.org/phobos/std_range.html#.only)
to be a collection of exactly one value, but not a type for "a
value of type T or nothing at all"
Option is being upgraded to handle an arbitrary (but compile
Suliman:
Maybe it would be possible to get some good idea from next
version of C#
Discussed a little here:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/naeqxidypkpehynmi...@forum.dlang.org
Bye,
bearophile
On 2013-12-10 18:35:37 +, bearophile said:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Should we follow Scala's example and add it?
Making an Option a D Range means it becomes a Mondad :-) There's then a
need for more awareness of Option!T in map/filter/zip.
Related:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.
On 12/10/13 10:59 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
We have only(x) (http://dlang.org/phobos/std_range.html#.only) to be a
collection of exactly one value, but not a type for "a value of type T
or nothing at all"
Option is being u
On Saturday, 7 December 2013 at 17:29:43 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Even Ada2012 has a similar syntax. I think it's worth having in
D.
The ER:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7176
Bye,
bearophile
similar to dart, my 2nd favorite lang :)
https://www.dartlang.org/articles/idiomatic-
Le 10/12/2013 03:54, Manu a écrit :
On 10 December 2013 11:42, deadalnix mailto:deadal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sunday, 8 December 2013 at 05:37:09 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Or maybe this is just another one of those cultural old age
indicators?
Has the term "refactorin
* Underline in red errors without compiling
I get this one for free in Emacs with flycheck. It's not _really_
without compiling since it calls the compiler behind my back, but
it's essentially the same thing.
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 19:26:27 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/10/13 10:59 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu
wrote:
We have only(x)
(http://dlang.org/phobos/std_range.html#.only) to be a
collection of exactly one value, b
Am Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:21:16 -0800
schrieb "H. S. Teoh" :
> D may not get you all the way to absolute every-last-drop-from-the-CPU
> performance
I firmly disagree.
--
Marco
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 19:26:27 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/10/13 10:59 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu
wrote:
We have only(x)
(http://dlang.org/phobos/std_range.html#.only) to be a
collection of exactly one value, b
Hi,
Well, I was looking over Brian Kernighan's website when I saw an
article titled: "D Construction".
Link: http://dailyprincetonian.com/opinion/2012/11/d-construction/
The content wasn't what I expected but it was funny anyway.
Quote from the article:
"Just don’t slack off too much. Remem
On 12/10/2013 1:01 PM, Marco Leise wrote:
Am Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:21:16 -0800
schrieb "H. S. Teoh" :
D may not get you all the way to absolute every-last-drop-from-the-CPU
performance
I firmly disagree.
Especially since if you write C code in D, you will get exactly C results.
I love Monadic null checking. Would be great if D would have it.
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 20:36:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2013 1:01 PM, Marco Leise wrote:
Am Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:21:16 -0800
schrieb "H. S. Teoh" :
D may not get you all the way to absolute
every-last-drop-from-the-CPU
performance
I firmly disagree.
Especially since if
On 12/10/2013 12:39 PM, Dicebot wrote:
I think it is better to rephrase it as "writing C code in D is possible but even
less convenient than in C".
Why would it be less convenient?
At the least, it'll compile a lot faster!
On 12/10/2013 4:28 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
I think this position is too restrictive and just wrong. If D is really
aiming to stop internal DSLs using operators then D is missing the whole
point of abstraction. But as noted I want code not just waffle to
further this discussion.
Looking forward
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 21:05:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
At the least, it'll compile a lot faster!
Small C programs compile a *lot* faster than small D programs
that use Phobos.
import std.stdio; == add half a second to your compile time.
$ time dmd hellod.d
real0m0.780s # YI
Am 10.12.2013 22:16, schrieb Adam D. Ruppe:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 21:05:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
At the least, it'll compile a lot faster!
Small C programs compile a *lot* faster than small D programs that use
Phobos.
import std.stdio; == add half a second to your compile time.
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:16:25PM +0100, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 21:05:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> >At the least, it'll compile a lot faster!
>
> Small C programs compile a *lot* faster than small D programs that
> use Phobos.
>
> import std.stdio; == add half a
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 21:05:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2013 12:39 PM, Dicebot wrote:
I think it is better to rephrase it as "writing C code in D is
possible but even
less convenient than in C".
Why would it be less convenient?
At the least, it'll compile a lot faster!
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 21:28:41 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Those are implementation issues, right?
Yeah, a lot of the blame can be placed on the intertwined phobos
modules. D without phobos is a lot faster to compile (and
produces significantly smaller exes).
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:52:10PM +0100, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 21:28:41 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> >Those are implementation issues, right?
>
> Yeah, a lot of the blame can be placed on the intertwined phobos
> modules. D without phobos is a lot faster to compile (
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 21:39:12 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
One of my template-heavy projects take almost 10 seconds to
compile just a single source file.
Always compile all your D files at once, that's my tip, otherwise
you'll pay that cost every time the file is imported!
But yeah, my
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he
mentioned the usefulness of the Option type - a zero or one
element collection (range in D terminology). Here's an article
discussing it:
http://danielwesthei
Am Tue, 10 Dec 2013 22:16:25 +0100
schrieb "Adam D. Ruppe" :
> On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 21:05:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> > At the least, it'll compile a lot faster!
>
> Small C programs compile a *lot* faster than small D programs
> that use Phobos.
>
> import std.stdio; == add half
On Friday, 6 December 2013 at 22:20:19 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
"there is no way proper C code can be slower than those
languages."
Didn't Bjarne cover this in his C++ performance talk at SD West
in 2007? Templates alone can make C++ and D code faster than
even hand-optimized C. And that
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:57:59 -0800, Suliman wrote:
Maybe it would be possible to get some good idea from next version of C#
It's only ideas about next version, but new future maybe next:
http://damieng.com/blog/2013/12/09/probable-c-6-0-features-illustrated
Let's not forget the biggest feat
Am 10.12.2013 23:49, schrieb Adam Wilson:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:57:59 -0800, Suliman wrote:
Maybe it would be possible to get some good idea from next version of C#
It's only ideas about next version, but new future maybe next:
http://damieng.com/blog/2013/12/09/probable-c-6-0-features-illust
On 12/10/2013 07:26 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2013 1:58 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Recovering all immutable and const qualifiers that are possible to
assign to the program is simple to do if the whole program is available.
I believe you are seriously mistaken about it being simple, or even
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 18:58:01 UTC, Suliman wrote:
Maybe it would be possible to get some good idea from next
version of C#
It's only ideas about next version, but new future maybe next:
http://damieng.com/blog/2013/12/09/probable-c-6-0-features-illustrated
I really like the "Inline
On 12/10/2013 11:49 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
Also I was reading an interview with Anders and he talked about
something VERY interesting. Immutable AST's...
I wonder how they did that?
I assume they just don't expose any mutating operations.
On 12/10/2013 3:04 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
Malloc is part of the language runtime. Everything needed is known about it, in
particular that it is pure (in the D sense). Also, the source code of malloc
will not be standard C code.
All right, so write your own storage allocator. How are you going to
On 12/10/2013 3:23 PM, Marco Leise wrote:
Isn't it fairer to compile only (-c):
dmd -c std_stdio.d 0,30s user 0,07s system 99% cpu 0,374 total
dmd -c printf.d 0,00s user 0,00s system 87% cpu 0,008 total
gcc -c printf.c 0,02s user 0,01s system 93% cpu 0,031 total
Yup, since gcc is not
On 12/10/2013 1:37 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
That's not too bad. One of my template-heavy projects take almost 10
seconds to compile just a single source file. And a single string import
can add up to 3-4 seconds (well, probably due to CTFE since I call
split() on the string).
That isn't C-style co
in std.utf shouldn't we throw UTFException instead of assert(0) in stride,
etc ?
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 14:54:23 -0800, Paulo Pinto
wrote:
Am 10.12.2013 23:49, schrieb Adam Wilson:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:57:59 -0800, Suliman wrote:
Maybe it would be possible to get some good idea from next version of
C#
It's only ideas about next version, but new future maybe next:
htt
On 12/10/13 5:35 PM, Namespace wrote:
I love Monadic null checking. Would be great if D would have it.
What does a monad have to do with that?
(just out of curiosity... BTW, the other day I friend tried to explain
me monads and he realized couldn't understand them himself)
On 11 December 2013 06:35, Namespace wrote:
> I love Monadic null checking. Would be great if D would have it.
>
Yeah that's awesome. Definitely the most interesting one to me too.
It's that sort of little detail that can make code better/safer due to a
convenient side-stepping of coder laziness
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 22:10:49 UTC, Jesse Phillips
wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and he
mentioned the usefulness of the Option type - a zero or one
element collection (range in D
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 03:48:51PM -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/10/2013 1:37 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >That's not too bad. One of my template-heavy projects take almost 10
> >seconds to compile just a single source file. And a single string
> >import can add up to 3-4 seconds (well, probably
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:47:47PM +0100, Sean Kelly wrote:
> On Friday, 6 December 2013 at 22:20:19 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> >
> >"there is no way proper C code can be slower than those
> >languages."
>
> Didn't Bjarne cover this in his C++ performance talk at SD West in
> 2007? Templates alo
On Wednesday, 11 December 2013 at 00:19:50 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:47:47PM +0100, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Friday, 6 December 2013 at 22:20:19 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
>
>"there is no way proper C code can be slower than those
>languages."
Didn't Bjarne cover this in his
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 15:52:06 Timothee Cour wrote:
> in std.utf shouldn't we throw UTFException instead of assert(0) in stride,
> etc ?
std.utf only uses assert(0) when that code should be unreachable. It's used to
catch bugs in the implementation, not in a function's input. If anything
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 01:33:24AM +0100, Sean Kelly wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 December 2013 at 00:19:50 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:47:47PM +0100, Sean Kelly wrote:
> >>On Friday, 6 December 2013 at 22:20:19 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> >>>
> >>>"there is no way proper C co
well then it's a bug:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11721
this is the 3rd regression I'm posting today!
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 15:52:06 Timothee Cour wrote:
> > in std.utf shouldn't we throw UTFException instea
On Wednesday, 11 December 2013 at 00:08:49 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 22:10:49 UTC, Jesse Phillips
wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 17:28:26 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
I talked to a programmer who knows Scala (among others) and
he mentioned the usefulness o
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 20:35:08 UTC, Namespace wrote:
I love Monadic null checking. Would be great if D would have it.
+1 on Monadic null checking. Do miss it from Groovy.
For me at least its the only thing on that list that I think D
could really use.
On 12/10/2013 4:10 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 03:48:51PM -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/10/2013 1:37 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
That's not too bad. One of my template-heavy projects take almost 10
seconds to compile just a single source file. And a single string
import can add
AFAIK the linux situation looks like this.
GTK is the current native toolkit for the Gnome based environments and
descendants including Unity.
Canonical are trying to move towards Qt for Unity.
Qt is the standard toolkit for KDE.
However Qt can treat GTK as a native toolkit and will render native
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 18:58:01 UTC, Suliman wrote:
Maybe it would be possible to get some good idea from next
version of C#
It's only ideas about next version, but new future maybe next:
http://damieng.com/blog/2013/12/09/probable-c-6-0-features-illustrated
Regarding #1 (Primary Cons
On 12/10/2013 3:53 PM, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
BTW, the other day I friend tried to explain me monads
and he realized couldn't understand them himself
The best way to learn something is to try to explain it to someone else.
85 matches
Mail list logo
