On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 22:11:51 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Is that a best-effort kind of approach? If so, that would be
pretty bad...
I don't exactly know how that Rust macro works, sorry, I am
still rather ignorant about Rust.
Bye,
bearophile
There is a guide in
On 2 November 2014 04:15, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 11/1/2014 6:35 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>
>> I'd say that I'd be nervous to see druntime chockers full of templates...?
>
>
> What's a chocker?
It's Australian for 'lots'.
> Why would templates make you nervous? The
On 11/2/2014 8:54 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Monday, 3 November 2014 at 03:29:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I got into the habit of layering in asserts to stop the program when it went
bad. "Do not pass go, do not collect $200" is the only strategy that has a
hope of working under such systems.
Th
On Monday, 3 November 2014 at 03:29:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I have considerable experience with what programs can do when
continuing to run after a bug. This was on real mode DOS, which
infamously does not seg fault on errors.
It's AWFUL. I've had quite enough of having to reboot the
o
On 11/2/2014 3:44 PM, Dicebot wrote:
They have hardware protection against sharing memory between processes. It's a
reasonable level of protection.
reasonable default - yes
reasoable level of protection in general - no
No language can help when that is the requirement.
1. very few processes
On 11/2/2014 3:57 PM, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 17:50:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
It is not the same thing as ref/out buffer argument.
Don't understand your comment.
Steven comment has mentioned two things about Tango approach - using stack
buffer as initial buffer and
On Tuesday, 28 October 2014 at 08:29:22 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
I see no reason to say anything about the alias syntax in the
style guide.
Consistency, and thus less confusion/mental overhead.
I don't think that you'll be able to make a strong case for
"Either it should
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 09:25:54 -0800
Dan Olson via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Like D, Java is LTR evaluation for assignment, and I think C# too. A
> similar situation to OP code can be created in Java by reassigning an
> array reference in saveIt().
what i'm talking about is that implicit changing of
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 17:50:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
It is not the same thing as ref/out buffer argument.
Don't understand your comment.
Steven comment has mentioned two things about Tango approach -
using stack buffer as initial buffer and extensive usage of ref
parameters fo
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 17:53:45 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/2/2014 3:48 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 15:02:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Which is exactly the statement I call wrong. With current OSes
processes aren't
decoupled units at all - it is
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 22:02:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 11/2/14 2:11 AM, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 01:28:15 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d
wrote:
1) Compile-time verification of format arguments -- passing
the wrong
number of arguments or argu
A 30 minute presentation done at NSSpain by Mike Ash, on how to do C
style unsafe programming with Swift,
http://vimeo.com/107707576
--
Paulo
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 12:49:47PM -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 11/1/14 6:25 PM, bearophile wrote:
[...]
> >And D writeln is not verified at compile-time, this is silly for a
> >language that tries to be reliable.
>
> Wasn't there a pull request that allowed `writef!"%
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Is that a best-effort kind of approach? If so, that would be
pretty bad...
I don't exactly know how that Rust macro works, sorry, I am still
rather ignorant about Rust.
Bye,
bearophile
On 3/11/2014 6:33 a.m., James wrote:
Hello,
I want to start using D for game development instead of C and C++.
This is my code :
**
import std.stdio;
import glfw3;
void main()
{
if(!glfwInit())
{
write
On 11/2/14 2:11 AM, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 01:28:15 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
1) Compile-time verification of format arguments -- passing the wrong
number of arguments or arguments of mismatching type will force
compilation failure. Currently, it wi
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 18:42:20 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
Imagine somebody has a type that cannot be @trusted because of
whatever reason. Maybe because it's legacy code, maybe it uses
resources it does not manage, … If you forcibly make logf
@safe, then this type cannot be used with lo
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 17:36:37 UTC, James wrote:
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 17:33:09 UTC, James wrote:
It's telling me that the libraries are in an invalid format.
How can I get the correct ones ? I got those from the GLFW
website
dmd -m64 main.d glfw3.d opengl32.lib glfw3.lib
Y
On 11/1/14 6:48 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
While writefln can be improved (Andrei has preapproved my enhancement
request to support compile-time format string, for example), there's no
way to make such improvements to GCC's format checking short of
modifying the compiler itself.
Oh
On 11/1/14 5:46 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/687
We need it to fix the site build. Thanks!
Andrei
FYI site is up to date now. I've had to disable dpl-docs generation
because it currently doesn't work. -- Andrei
On 11/1/14 6:25 PM, bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
D has writefln which does not have printf's issues. There's no reason
to add a feature for printf.
The feature we are talking about is not just for D writeln, as I've
tried to explain several times.
Well maybe then it's time to reassess w
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 20:12:17 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Perhaps a good enough FlagsEnum can be implemented with pure D
library code.
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2058
On 11/2/2014 12:12 PM, bearophile wrote:
I think the free mixing of signed and unsigned integral values is not a good
idea in D.
It's simply not workable to put a wall between them. Every proposal for it has
entailed various unfortunate, ugly, and arbitrary consequences.
Languages like Java
Walter Bright:
Why aren't you using Ada if this is critical to you? (I'm not
being sarcastic, this is a fair question.)
It's not critical...
Ada is not fun, too much new stuff to learn and to adapt to, and
I can't influence Ada evolution in any way. My hope for preferred
future system langua
class A : B
{
B b;
alias b this; //Error: super type (B) always hides
"aliasthised" type B because base classes should be processed
before alias this types.
}
This isn't an error? Just because A inherits B doesn't mean that
the alias is wrong?
e.g., If you have
class A1 { B b; alia
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 18:29:09 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
In my opinion inference is better choice for small building
blocks (like algorithms). For complete system like logging API
forcing @safe makes more sense as whatever its internals are,
exposed API should never be @system
This isn't ab
I don't recall off the top of my head some non-template innards
actually might require @safe, but apart from that, why not just
leave the job to template attribute inference entirely? If
somebody wants to log a type with a @system toString in
non-@safe code, why not just let them?
David
I
On 11/2/2014 5:44 AM, bearophile wrote:
It happens often enough to justify a similar feature in Ada2012. (This is the
main point of this whole discussion. The other parts of this answer are less
important).
Why aren't you using Ada if this is critical to you? (I'm not being sarcastic,
this is
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 13:06:24 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
I had initial go at cleaning safety attributes :
https://github.com/Dicebot/phobos/tree/logger-fix-trust
It still needs one druntime PR merged
(https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/1009)
to be done properly but shou
On 11/1/14, 8:31 AM, bearophile wrote:
Third part of the "A Programming Language for Games", by Jonathan Blow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTqZNujQOlA
Discussions:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2kxi89/jonathan_blow_a_programming_language_for_games/
His language seems to disa
On 11/2/2014 3:48 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 15:02:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
Which is exactly the statement I call wrong. With current OSes processes aren't
decoupled units at all - it is all about feature set you stick to. Same with any
other units.
T
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 17:33:09 UTC, James wrote:
Hello,
I want to start using D for game development instead of C and
C++.
This is my code :
**
import std.stdio;
import glfw3;
void main()
{
if(!glfwIni
Hello,
I want to start using D for game development instead of C and C++.
This is my code :
**
import std.stdio;
import glfw3;
void main()
{
if(!glfwInit())
{
writeln("Could not start GLFW3");
}
GLFWwi
Like D, Java is LTR evaluation for assignment, and I think C# too. A
similar situation to OP code can be created in Java by reassigning an
array reference in saveIt().
And there is dispute about is expression: see
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ubafmwvxwtolhmnxb...@forum.dlang.org?page=5
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP66
I've applied some changes to it, however there are still some
unresolved questions.
Here's my destruction:
* "symbol can be a field or a get-property (method annotated
with @property and taking zero parameters)." -> actually:
(a) the @property annotation is not
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 11:31:32 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Third part of the "A Programming Language for Games", by
Jonathan Blow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTqZNujQOlA
Discussions:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2kxi89/jonathan_blow_a_programming_language_for_games/
Walter Bright:
I don't see the use cases, in mine or other code.
Designing a language feature around printf is a mistake.
I agree. Let's talk about other use cases.
I've considered the feature, and looked at code. It just
doesn't happen very often.
I have written plenty of D code (perhaos
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 08:48:46 UTC, Jonathan Barnard
wrote:
The upcoming version 1.4 of Go uses write barriers in
preparation for the future implementation of a concurrent and
generational GC. On the mailing list thread discussing the beta
(https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 13:13:17 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 08:48:46 UTC, Jonathan Barnard
wrote:
The upcoming version 1.4 of Go uses write barriers in
preparation for the future implementation of a concurrent and
generational GC. On the mailing list thread disc
I had initial go at cleaning safety attributes :
https://github.com/Dicebot/phobos/tree/logger-fix-trust
It still needs one druntime PR merged
(https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/1009) to
be done properly but should be ready for destruction.
David snipet results in this
Would such an implementation also be possible in a language
like Go or D with internal/'thin' pointers?
Last time I thought about it, card marking is indeed the only
write barrier that is not affected by interior pointers. I could
be totally wrong though.
On Saturday, November 01, 2014 18:57:09 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Jonathan was also reportedly working on breaking up std.datetime into
> manageable pieces, but it's been a long time and so far it seems to have
> been far easier said than done.
Breaking it up isn't all that hard, just
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 15:02:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
I never said "component" == "process". All I said was that at
the OS
level, at least with current OSes, processes are the smallest
unit
that is decoupled from each other.
Which is exactly the statement I call wr
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 10:30:21 UTC, Araq wrote:
And I think these are meaningless results. You can see here for
instance what a write barrier can look like:
http://psy-lob-saw.blogspot.de/2014/10/the-jvm-write-barrier-card-marking.html
Would such an implementation also be possible i
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 08:48:46 UTC, Jonathan Barnard
wrote:
The upcoming version 1.4 of Go uses write barriers in
preparation for the future implementation of a concurrent and
generational GC. On the mailing list thread discussing the beta
(https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 00:29:10 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On Saturday, 1 November 2014 at 17:35:37 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
There is still a critical issue with std.experimental.logger
that would prevent it from being merged right now: The abuse
of @trusted all over the code.
Thank yo
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 01:28:15 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
1) Compile-time verification of format arguments -- passing the
wrong
number of arguments or arguments of mismatching type will force
compilation failure. Currently, it will compile successfully
but fail at
runt
The upcoming version 1.4 of Go uses write barriers in preparation
for the future implementation of a concurrent and generational
GC. On the mailing list thread discussing the beta
(https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/7VAcfULjiB8),
a few people note speed reductions of 30-50% in
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 08:22:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
10 to 50 times slower is not a solution. If your app can stand
such a degradation, it would be better off written in Python.
If there was a practical solution for C, it likely would have
been incorporated into clang and gcc.
Pyt
On 01.11.2014 20:00, Josh wrote:
I only have 1 sc.ini, and -v showed the correct path. Setting the
LINKCMD64 variable in sc.ini fixed the issue, although it seems kind of
redundant as I copied LINKCMD and just added 64:
; Windows installer uncomments the version detected
;VC2013 LINKCMD=%VCINS
On 11/2/2014 12:06 AM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad"
" wrote:
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 06:39:14 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
This is not a solution. C has successfully resisted all attempts to add bounds
checking.
That was a student project, but the paper presented an overview of techniques
which is
On 02.11.2014 00:09, Teak wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 April 2014 at 13:59:31 UTC, Capture_A_Lag wrote:
I don't know what I have done, but everything works good now.
Thanks everybody for help!
Hi, Im having the same problem you had trying to run a d language
project...I keep getting the following e
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 08:39:26 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
There are also some proprietary C compilers for embedded
programming that claim to support bound checks, but I don't
know how far they go or if they require language
extensions/restrictions.
Btw, related to this is the eff
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 07:29:25 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
The amount of money that went into such (bad) design decision...
And it won't stop bleeding so long C and C++ exist.
Yes, that is true (if we ignore esoteric C dialects that add
safer features). Ada is a better solution if you wan
Am 02.11.2014 um 02:23 schrieb "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
":
More papers on C bounds checking:
http://llvm.org/pubs/2006-05-24-SAFECode-BoundsCheck.html
Bounds checking on flight control software for Mars expedition:
http://ti.arc.nasa.gov/m/profile/ajvenet/pldi04.pdf
The amoun
On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 06:39:14 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
This is not a solution. C has successfully resisted all
attempts to add bounds checking.
That was a student project, but the paper presented an overview
of techniques which is why I linked to it. A realistic solution
is probably
57 matches
Mail list logo
