On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 22:02:47 UTC, Prudence wrote:
Oh, and who says you couldn't keep both systems?
Nobody. There's absolutely nothing stopping you from defining
your one constants and bindings. I think you should actually do
it and see for yourself the pros and cons in practice.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15018
github-bugzi...@puremagic.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15018
--- Comment #2 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com ---
Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/7a8fc052b6a6ab0a9296e2319f1e3825e66a88c0
Merge pull request #5054
On 08/09/15 5:27 AM, Shammah Chancellor wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 14:44:05 UTC, nx wrote:
https://github.com/NightmareX1337/DX
Don't kill me, I'm just trying to help...
You can report issues and create pull requests :)
Destroy!
Hi NX,
Thanks for the document. A lot of what
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15025
Issue ID: 15025
Summary: duplicate array initializers are only checked in todt
glue code
Product: D
Version: D2
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 at 00:57:32 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
I am very happy! :)
It will be available on many other distribution channels like
Amazon in a few days as well but the following is the link that
pays me the most royalty:
https://www.createspace.com/5618128
This revision
On Mon, 2015-09-07 at 02:56 +, Charles via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> […]
>
> x = float[imax][jmax]; //x is about 8 GB of floats
> for(j = 0; j < jmax; j++){
> //create some local variables.
> for(i = 0; i < imax; i++){
> x[j][i] = complicatedFunction(i, x[j-1], other, local,
Some great advice:
http://rentes.github.io/programming/stackoverflow/2015/09/03/Wisdom-of-the-Ancients/
On Tuesday, 8 September 2015 at 02:07:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Some great advice:
http://rentes.github.io/programming/stackoverflow/2015/09/03/Wisdom-of-the-Ancients/
Totally agree. Just posted a solution to my own problem:
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 19:06:48 UTC, Prudence wrote:
It's called encapsulation. It prevents namespace pollution and
identifier collision.
This is already provided by the D module system. Even if you were
to define a WM_CREATE in your code, it would not cause a major
problem with the
On 09/07/2015 08:55 PM, Enamex wrote:
- Templates are obvious enough as they are IMHO.
It's also obvious that declaration syntax mimicking use syntax would be
superior.
> void main()
> {
> std.stdio.writeln("Hello world!"); // Error: undefined identifier 'std'
> }
struct Mod(string B="") {
template opDispatch(string M) {
static if (__traits(compiles, { mixin(`import `~B~"."~M~`;`); }))
mixin(`import opDispatch =
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 16:10:31 UTC, Israel wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 14:44:05 UTC, nx wrote:
https://github.com/NightmareX1337/DX
Destroy!
Yea ill admit, i came from C# and i hate underscores. I prefer
PascalCase above anything.
3 of the keys in my keychain are of
On Sunday, 6 September 2015 at 22:04:55 UTC, Namal wrote:
oh, sorry. But I found out what I have been doing wrong besides
that.
arr.sort.uniq;
uniq(arr) or arr.sort.uniq; compiles but doesn't store it in
the arr array, I need to store it in a new one.
Right, it's like
int x = 3;
// x + 5;
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 10:25:09 UTC, deed wrote:
writeln(x);// or you can pass it to a function.
I meant `writeln(x + 5)`
On Monday 07 September 2015 14:12, Bahman Movaqar wrote:
> Thanks. This is indeed helpful. OT but where can I view the
> documentation for `unittest` and `assert`?
unittest: http://dlang.org/unittest.html
assert: http://dlang.org/expression.html#AssertExpression (I don't know why
it's
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 12:16:14 UTC, anonymous wrote:
On Monday 07 September 2015 14:12, Bahman Movaqar wrote:
Thanks. This is indeed helpful. OT but where can I view the
documentation for `unittest` and `assert`?
unittest: http://dlang.org/unittest.html
assert:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14926
--- Comment #8 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com ---
Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/commit/281bf608c07b0acdfc5ff97e1699057896082155
Merge pull request
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 14:44:05 UTC, nx wrote:
https://github.com/NightmareX1337/DX
Don't kill me, I'm just trying to help...
You can report issues and create pull requests :)
Destroy!
- Your point against undisciplined UFCS: Completely agree.
I'm writing a 'DIP' that I'm probably
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 18:42:59 UTC, Prudence wrote:
because it is confusing and hard for you to understand over
Nope, I'm saying it is a pointless change. If you do that, EVERY
time you want to look something up, you need to rewrite WM.* into
WM_* since that's what the docs say. And
On Monday 07 September 2015 21:06, Prudence wrote:
> If you think mentally changing a . to a _ is a hassle then your
> in trouble! An apple a day simply won't help!
[...]
> Oh well, some people
> just don't like progress! Do you want to go back to using wooden
> wheels too?
[...]
> Get out of
07.09.2015 21:37, Benjamin Thaut пишет:
snip
So far I haven't found a situation where I couldn't make it work the way
I wanted. Its just some work to write the D headers for the C++ classes
and vise versa, because you have to duplicate everything once more. An
automated tool for this would be
On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 16:19:49 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
Hi Benjamin
Would you be able to give a little more colour on what the
limits are of interoperability for C++ with DMD master or
release ? As I understand it destructors and constructors
don't work, and obviously it will get
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 17:59:43 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 17:44:54 UTC, Prudence wrote:
const WM_* -> add to enum WM;
else WM_* -> WM.*
I'm against that. The documentation all says WM_* and we
shouldn't muck with it.
huh?
Are you saying you don't
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 18:58:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 18:42:59 UTC, Prudence wrote:
because it is confusing and hard for you to understand over
Nope, I'm saying it is a pointless change. If you do that,
EVERY time you want to look something up, you
101 - 125 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
