On Sunday, April 02, 2017 20:40:15 Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> I grabbed the official 10.3-CURRENT vm image from the freebsd website
> and gave it a whirl. For the 64 bit test run, the only failure was
> std.datetime unit tests failure. Apparently LocalTime().stdName is null
> and the
On 3/31/2017 6:30 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Friday, March 31, 2017 15:51:33 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
The autotester is currently at FreeBSD 8.4. This is rather obsolete. The
linker that is standard on 8.4 is causing problems:
https://github.com/dlang/dm
On 4/2/2017 7:02 PM, crimaniak wrote:
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 05:16:23 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Using a ref counted solution brings with it a host of problems because
the compiler is not set up to ref count class object references, nor
is any existing code set up to deal with that.
Please d
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 05:16:23 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Using a ref counted solution brings with it a host of problems
because
the compiler is not set up to ref count class object
references, nor
is any existing code set up to deal with that.
Please describe in more detail the problems in
On 4/2/2017 2:05 PM, ketmar wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
1. If the thrown object was not allocated with the GC (such as if it was
'emplaced'), then doing a GC free on it at the catch site will corrupt memory.
no, it won't. it is completely safe to free non-GC-owned memory with GC[0].
[0] http
On Saturday, 1 April 2017 at 22:08:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/1/2017 7:54 AM, deadalnix wrote:
It doesn't need any kind of throw new scope Exception, and was
proposed,
literally, years ago during discussion around DIP25 and alike.
A link to that proposal would be appreciated.
The for
Walter Bright wrote:
1. If the thrown object was not allocated with the GC (such as if it was
'emplaced'), then doing a GC free on it at the catch site will corrupt
memory.
no, it won't. it is completely safe to free non-GC-owned memory with GC[0].
[0] http://dpldocs.info/experimental-docs/c
On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 at 13:34:37 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2013-11-13 13:20, Timothee Cour wrote:
alas, no, I posted on exactly this some times ago:
glob is non-recursive in D:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.2367.1382320537.1719.digitalmars-d-le...@puremagic.com
Hmm, right,
On 4/2/2017 10:21 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Such is not possible with a scoped catch. Of course, that's a concern only if we
want to preserve backwards compatibility.
That can be done if the user makes a clone of 'e' (I don't propose the compiler
do this automatically).
In turn I don'
On 4/2/2017 8:24 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
Copy means allocate and then deallocate in the catch, defeating the whole
propose of preallocating.
That's right.
Would it be possible to just set a bit somewhere that
indicates that the exception is preallocated and need not be freed.
Yes, it's
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 18:41:45 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 18:16:43 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
I do not want GC _allocation_ for embedded systems (don't even
want to link in the GC or GC stub code) ;-)
Then don't use operator `new`... you're probably using some
ki
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 17:22:11 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 4/1/17 2:56 PM, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
The other @nogc blocker is .destroy
How do you mean that? -- Andrei
https://github.com/dlang/druntime/blob/master/src/object.d#L2732
destroy() infers it's "@nogc"-ness from rt_fina
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 18:16:43 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
I do not want GC _allocation_ for embedded systems (don't even
want to link in the GC or GC stub code) ;-)
Then don't use operator `new`... you're probably using some kind
of custom druntime anyway.
Am Sun, 02 Apr 2017 00:09:09 +
schrieb Adam D. Ruppe :
> On Saturday, 1 April 2017 at 14:54:21 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> > The problem you want to address is not GC allocations, it is GC
> > collection cycles. If everything is freed, then there is no GC
> > problem. not only this, but this is
On 4/1/17 2:56 PM, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
The other @nogc blocker is .destroy
How do you mean that? -- Andrei
On 4/1/17 2:18 PM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
I don't understand what's so difficult to just recognize that "throw new
Exception" creates a unique object that is passed to the exception
handler.
That would be a good possibility: default to creating exceptions as
scope objects, speculating that th
On 4/2/17 9:14 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/1/2017 11:50 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 05:16:23 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Problem
===
[...]
How will this interact with preallocated exceptions (e.g. from
Liran's dconf
talk last year)?
It will copy them and thro
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 11:44:16 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 10:55:22 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
a ~ "abc" "def";
If the order is important, make it `a ~ ("abc" ~ "def")`
instead. I'd argue that with concatenation usually being
left-associative, clearly statin
On 2017-04-02 13:14, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
And if the problem is the deprecation message, well, you can only put so
much in a deprecation message without making it too long.
It could contain a link to some documentation explaining it in more detail.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 10:55:22 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
a ~ "abc" "def";
If the order is important, make it `a ~ ("abc" ~ "def")` instead.
I'd argue that with concatenation usually being left-associative,
clearly stating the intention to evaluate the side first would be
a good idea
On Sunday, April 02, 2017 10:55:22 Johan Engelen via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 10:05:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 02, 2017 11:47:52 Jacob Carlborg via
> >
> > Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >> On 2017-04-02 11:22, Johan Engelen wrote:
> >> > Since 2.072, impl
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 10:02:09 UTC, Tobias Pankrath wrote:
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 09:22:38 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
Did we lose the ability to break strings across lines?
[1]
https://dlang.org/changelog/2.072.0.html#deprecated_implicit_cat
Delimited strings are the way to go.
So
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 10:05:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, April 02, 2017 11:47:52 Jacob Carlborg via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 2017-04-02 11:22, Johan Engelen wrote:
> Since 2.072, implicit string concatenation is deprecated
> [1]. Can someone give me a link to the discussion ab
On Sunday, April 02, 2017 11:47:52 Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 2017-04-02 11:22, Johan Engelen wrote:
> > Since 2.072, implicit string concatenation is deprecated [1].
> > Can someone give me a link to the discussion about this?
> >
> > I am wondering about the language spec change
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 09:22:38 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
Did we lose the ability to break strings across lines?
[1]
https://dlang.org/changelog/2.072.0.html#deprecated_implicit_cat
Delimited strings are the way to go.
http://dlang.org/spec/lex.html#StringLiteral
On 2017-04-02 11:22, Johan Engelen wrote:
Since 2.072, implicit string concatenation is deprecated [1].
Can someone give me a link to the discussion about this?
I am wondering about the language spec changes involved.
```
"abc"
"def"
```
means something different than
```
"abc"
~ "def"
Since 2.072, implicit string concatenation is deprecated [1].
Can someone give me a link to the discussion about this?
I am wondering about the language spec changes involved.
```
"abc"
"def"
```
means something different than
```
"abc"
~ "def"
```
right? (for example because opBinary!(“
On Saturday, 1 April 2017 at 23:54:45 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/1/2017 12:38 PM, Rene Zwanenburg wrote:
I just tried to register for DConf, but PayPal is borken at
the moment. (Not the
link on the DConf website, PayPal itself is throwing errors)
In case it's still not working tomorrow, wo
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 04:34:34 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Sat, Apr 01, 2017 at 05:06:14PM +, Inquie via
Digitalmars-d wrote: [...]
How far off until newCTFE is usable to compile the majority of
templates out there?
CTFE and templates are two separate things. You may want to
read this
On 4/1/2017 11:50 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 05:16:23 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Problem
===
[...]
How will this interact with preallocated exceptions (e.g. from Liran's dconf
talk last year)?
It will copy them and throw the copy.
30 matches
Mail list logo
