On Thursday, 16 February 2017 at 21:05:51 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[ ... ]
Hi there,
I just pulled another all nighter.
I found a bug in the code that was supposed to adjust the values
of || and &&.
As will as a mixup in the error messages for overlapping
slice-assignment.
Both are fixed.
I
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 14:27:53 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
It seems I am on a bit of a roll getting changesets relating to
D support for SCons into an appropriate state so that they get
merged into the mainline SCons repository. So maybe now is a
time to get any "pet peeves" with D support
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 09:42:50 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
In case anyone has missed recent news, SCons seems now to work
without any problems using Python 3
Nice.
I am using Python 3 to run all my SCons D builds.
Me too :)
I want to start by stating that the discussion around being able
to throw Error from nothrow functions and the compiler
optimizations that follow is important to the thoughts below.
The other aspect of array bounds checking is that those
particular checks will not be added in -release. There h
On 6/8/17 11:19 AM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 14:13:53 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
void foo(Mutex m, Data d) pure
{
synchronized(m)
{
// ... manipulate d
} // no guarantee m gets unlocked
}
Isn't synchronized(m) not nothrow?
You're right, it i
On 06/08/2017 05:09 AM, Dominikus Dittes Scherkl wrote:
> Wow. Answer was actually visible before the OP. THAT is what I would
> call fast. Did you use vibe.d?
Your answer hasn't arrived yet. Using something other than vibe.d? :p
Ali
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 14:13:53 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
void foo(Mutex m, Data d) pure
{
synchronized(m)
{
// ... manipulate d
} // no guarantee m gets unlocked
}
-Steve
Isn't synchronized(m) not nothrow?
On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 14:37 +, bachmeier via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 14:27:53 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> > It seems I am on a bit of a roll getting changesets relating to
> > D support for SCons into an appropriate state so that they get
> > merged into the mainlin
On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 14:55 +, Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 13:37:41 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
>
> > Exactly my point. Using SQLAlchemy made me actually enjoy
> > writing database code. Which I did last year having avoided it
>
> Using ORM like SQLAlchem
On 06/08/2017 04:02 PM, Olivier FAURE wrote:
That's true. A "pure after cleanup" function is incompatible with
catching Errors (unless we introduce a "scope(error)" keyword that also
runs on errors, but that comes with other problems).
Is pureMalloc supposed to be representative of pure functi
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 13:37:41 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
Exactly my point. Using SQLAlchemy made me actually enjoy
writing database code. Which I did last year having avoided it
Using ORM like SQLAlchemy certainly has benefits but like any
other ORM, it generates hideous SQL code, somet
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 13:06:55 UTC, Ozan (O/N/S) wrote:
Your sqlite-d solution would be complete if writing sqlite
files are also possible. Ignore the SQL parsing stuff, it does
not fit in a world of fast data processing.
Writing or rather modifying sqlite-dbs is a bit harder then
readi
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 14:27:53 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
It seems I am on a bit of a roll getting changesets relating to
D support for SCons into an appropriate state so that they get
merged into the mainline SCons repository. So maybe now is a
time to get any "pet peeves" with D support
It seems I am on a bit of a roll getting changesets relating to D
support for SCons into an appropriate state so that they get merged
into the mainline SCons repository. So maybe now is a time to get any
"pet peeves" with D support in SCons fixed.
For myself, I am currently working on a new tool "
On 6/8/17 9:42 AM, Olivier FAURE wrote:
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 12:20:19 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Hm... if you locked an object that was passed in on the stack, for
instance, there is no guarantee the object gets unlocked.
This wouldn't be allowed unless the object was duplicated
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 13:02:38 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
Catching the resulting error is @safe when you throw the int*
away. So if f is `pure` and you make sure that the arguments
don't survive the `try` block, you're good, because f
supposedly cannot have reached anything else. This is your
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 12:20:19 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Hm... if you locked an object that was passed in on the stack,
for instance, there is no guarantee the object gets unlocked.
This wouldn't be allowed unless the object was duplicated /
created inside the try block.
Aside
On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 11:36 +, Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
[…]
> The Alternative is not doing SQL at all.
> But building the queries inside your code.
Exactly my point. Using SQLAlchemy made me actually enjoy writing
database code. Which I did last year having avoided it since I wa
On Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 19:16:07 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 19:10:26 UTC, Ozan wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 17:51:30 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
Hi guys
I made a small video.
Mature and heavily optimized C library vs. young D upstart.
See for yourself how it
On 06/08/2017 11:27 AM, Olivier FAURE wrote:
Contracts are made to preempt memory corruption, and to protect against
*programming* errors; they're not recoverable because breaking a
contract means that from now on the program is in a state that wasn't
anticipated by the programmer.
Which mean
On 6/7/17 12:20 PM, Olivier FAURE wrote:
On Monday, 5 June 2017 at 14:05:27 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I don't think this will work. Only throwing Error makes a function
nothrow. A nothrow function may not properly clean up the stack while
unwinding. Not because the stack unwinding code s
On Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 21:18:21 UTC, ketmar wrote:
Ozan wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 09:44:55 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Is there an issue with the tests? Surprised that vibe.d is
not higher in the rating...
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r14&hw=ph&test=fortun
On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 08:44:56 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
But what is D's equivalent to Python's SQLAlchemy? C++ now has
sqlpp11.
Anyone doing SQL code manipulation with strings in another
language is doing it wrong. Internal DSLs FTW.
The Alternative is not doing SQL at all.
But buil
In case anyone has missed recent news, SCons seems now to work without
any problems using Python 3 (the one true Python – until Python 4,
obviously). I am using Python 3 to run all my SCons D builds.
Obviously this relates to using a checkout of the mainline Mercurial
repository and using default
On Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 19:45:05 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
You gave the argument against catching out-of-bounds errors as:
"it means an invariant is broken, which means the code
surrounding it probably makes invalid assumptions and shouldn't
be trusted."
That line of reasoning applies to @tru
On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 20:40 +, Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 20:12:22 UTC, cym13 wrote:
>
> > It should be noted that the benchmark isn't fair, it favours
> > the sqlite3 implementation as parsing and preparing the
> > statement isn't measured. And yes,
26 matches
Mail list logo
