On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 22:30:47 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:52:45 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
it should come with a warning label that says "D is in many
parts still at an experimental stage and ships
On 4 September 2018 at 04:19, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:07:21 UTC, RhyS wrote:
>>
>> A good example being the resources going into DMD, LDC, GDC... 3 Compilers
>> for one language, when even well funded languages stick to one compiler. And
>> now
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:09:44 UTC, Andrey wrote:
Hello,
Here is a code with comments: https://run.dlang.io/is/BNl2Up.
I don't understand how to pass lambda into template.
I get an error:
onlineapp.d(18): Error: template instance `qwerty!((i) => "arg"
~ i.to!string ~ "[0] == '?'",
On Monday, 20 August 2018 at 00:14:03 UTC, Shigeki Karita wrote:
On Sunday, 19 August 2018 at 20:33:45 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
Proof of concept works, but it requires some further
development to be useful to do work in.
[...]
Great. I have tried DUB integration. It seems to work.
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 19:35, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 02:24:25 UTC, Manu wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 18:45, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 17:15:03 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
> >> wrote:
> >> >
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 03:38:41 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
We have classes and structs:
Classes:
- Default Storage: GC Heap
- Indirection Overhead: Yes
- Semantics: Reference
- Passed By: Copying the Data's Address
Structs:
- Default Storage: Stack
- Indirection Overhead:
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 04:03:19 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
There are also a few additional differences. classes can
inherit implementations, but using the technique illustrated in
https://theartofmachinery.com/2018/08/13/inheritance_and_polymorphism_2.html, you can get something very
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 21:55:57 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
By contrast, a function that returns an `Expected!T` does
*not* force its caller to acknowledge it. If an error occurs,
and the caller never checks value or hasValue...nothing
happens.
That's called squelching an
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 03:38:41 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
We have classes and structs:
Classes:
- Default Storage: GC Heap
- Indirection Overhead: Yes
- Semantics: Reference
- Passed By: Copying the Data's Address
Structs:
- Default Storage: Stack
- Indirection Overhead:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:05:10 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Glad to announce D 2.082.0.
This release comes with more efficient update functions for
associative arrays, unsafe code in debug blocks, UDAs for
function parameters, an improved dependency resolution and
avoidance of online
We have classes and structs:
Classes:
- Default Storage: GC Heap
- Indirection Overhead: Yes
- Semantics: Reference
- Passed By: Copying the Data's Address
Structs:
- Default Storage: Stack
- Indirection Overhead: No
- Semantics: Value
- Passed By: Copying the Data (except where the compiler
It seems pretty well established around here that:
1. Doing anything after a process has entered an unknown state is
dangerous, and the more activity, the more danger (Note also, the
transition to an unknown state actually occurs *before* any assert which
is intended to detect it.)
2. For
On 9/3/2018 7:19 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
The way for D to appeal to more people is not to address
the complaints of those who spend more time writing on the forum grumbling but
don't use it much, because in my experience you do much better appealing to the
people who are your best customers
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 02:24:25 UTC, Manu wrote:
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 18:45, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 17:15:03 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M
> Davis wrote:
>> Most of the work
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 18:45, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 17:15:03 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
> wrote:
> > On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
> > wrote:
> >> Most of the work that gets done is the stuff that the folks
> >>
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:07:21 UTC, RhyS wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:41:48 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
Yes. It almost sounds like a smooth experience would be a bad
thing to have, especially with the classic "you don't need an
IDE anyway" speech. Editing experience seems
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 19:31:58 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Because they can't hold a candle to vim. As far as text editing
goes, there simply is no comparison.
All these arguments, especially the above, makes me sad.
May be this is the nature of open source that volunteers will
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 17:15:03 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Most of the work that gets done is the stuff that the folks
contributing think is the most important - frequently what is
most important for them for what
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
I think this sort of misunderstanding is the source of a lot of
friction on this forum. Some users think (or in my case:
thought) that D will be a sound and stable language one day, a
language they can use for loads of stuff, while
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 22:07:10 UTC, aliak wrote:
Why does it work with nogc but not with pure?
Cheers,
- Ali
You can't define an impure function inside a pure unittest. If
you move `modify` outside the unittest block, and change the
argument from a lambda to a function pointer, it
On 09/03/2018 02:55 PM, Joakim wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
But if you're ever expecting IDE support to be a top priority of many
of the contributors, then you're going to be sorely disappointed. It's
the sort of thing that we care about because
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19214
--- Comment #1 from Manu ---
https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/2292
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19215
Issue ID: 19215
Summary: dlang bot add reference to PR in bugzilla?
Product: D
Version: D2
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19194
--- Comment #3 from Manu ---
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8655
--
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:52:45 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
it should come with a warning label that says "D is in many
parts still at an experimental stage and ships with no
guarantees whatsoever. Use at your own risk."
Well
In another thread [0] this function can be used to call non nogc
code from nogc code
import std.traits;
auto assumeNoGC(T)(T t) {
enum attrs = functionAttributes!T | FunctionAttribute.nogc;
return cast(SetFunctionAttributes!(T, functionLinkage!T,
attrs)) t;
}
And then you can use it
On 09/03/2018 02:49 AM, Paul Backus wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 04:49:40 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa)
wrote:
Note that the above has *nothing* to do with retrieving a value.
Retrieving a value is merely used by the implementation as a trigger
to lazily decide whether the caller
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 11:36:52 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
I'm rather sad that I've never seen these ideas outside of the
aerospace industry. Added to that is all the pushback on them I
get here, on reddit, and on hackernews.
Just chiming in to say you're certainly not ignored,
On Wednesday, 29 August 2018 at 05:01:14 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/25/2018 5:42 AM, Chris M. wrote:
What about my other point then on the syntax? I think
something similar to what I suggested would be a much more
flexible solution and is worth considering.
Much more work would be needed
On 9/3/2018 8:33 AM, tide wrote:
Yes why wouldn't a company want to fix a "feature" where by, if you have a
scratch on a DVD you have to go buy another one in order to play it.
Not playing it with an appropriate message is fine. Hanging the machine is not.
It's obviously not that big of a
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19214
Issue ID: 19214
Summary: Support object.destruct() for efficient (and correct!)
destruction
Product: D
Version: D2
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 21:12:39 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
This does make me think of one thing: Shouldn't assert
expressions be required to be pure? (even if only weakly pure)
Not sure how much practical problems that would create, but at
least in theory it certainly
On Monday, September 3, 2018 12:26:57 PM MDT Chris via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> There is no real plan and
> only problems that someone deems interesting or challenging at a
> given moment are tackled. If they solve a problem for a lot of
> users, it's only a side effect. The advent of a D Foundation
On Monday, September 3, 2018 12:55:01 PM MDT Joakim via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > But if you're ever expecting IDE support to be a top priority
> > of many of the contributors, then you're going to be sorely
> >
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:09:44 UTC, Andrey wrote:
Hello,
Here is a code with comments: https://run.dlang.io/is/BNl2Up.
I don't understand how to pass lambda into template.
I get an error:
onlineapp.d(18): Error: template instance `qwerty!((i) => "arg"
~ i.to!string ~ "[0] == '?'",
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:03:18 UTC, Soma wrote:
Sorry to disrupt your threat, but as a lurking in this forum
using D for small projects, and after looking such snippet my
first impression is how D is getting polluted and becoming more
like Java and C++.
"final class", "public final
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I just spoke with Dicebot about work stuff. He incidentally
mentioned what I said before based on my impressions. The
people doing work with a language have better things to do than
spend a lot of time on forums. And I think
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I just spoke with Dicebot about work stuff. He incidentally
mentioned what I said before based on my impressions. The
people doing work with a language have better things to do than
spend a lot of time on forums. And I think
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
But if you're ever expecting IDE support to be a top priority
of many of the contributors, then you're going to be sorely
disappointed. It's the sort of thing that we care about because
we care about D being successful, but
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
it should come with a warning label that says "D is in many
parts still at an experimental stage and ships with no
guarantees whatsoever. Use at your own risk."
Well it comes with the Boost license that says: `THE SOFTWARE IS
PROVIDED
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Most of the work that gets done is the stuff that the folks
contributing think is the most important - frequently what is
most important for them for what they do, and very few (if any)
of the major contributors use or care
On 9/3/2018 1:55 PM, Gambler wrote:
> There is this VR game called Fantastic Contraption. Its interface is
> light-years ahead of anything else I've seen in VR. The point of the
> game is to design animated 3D structures that solve the problem of
> traversing various obstacles while moving from
so I'im doing an expansive operation with a file, to try speed
up, i switch to using parallel but keeping in the otuput printing
thread-safe. But for some reason, even using synchonized, it
doesn't work as expected, for example, it output multiples
results on same time, as in the example
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 19:42:20 UTC, bauss wrote:
unmaintainable piece of code:
```
final class ClassName : SoapBinding, Interface
{
public:
final:
this()
{
super();
}
import __stdtraits = std.traits;
static foreach (member; __traits(derivedMembers, Interface))
{
I have to delete some quoted text to make this manageable.
On 9/2/2018 5:07 PM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> [...]
> GUI programming has been attempted a lot. (See Scratch for one of the
> latest, possibly most successful attempts). But there are real,
> practical reasons it's never made
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 15:51:37 UTC, lurker wrote:
if i remember correctly (5.), it wants a different/other
version of the tool chain.
never the less, i'll continue using c# and not install (1.)
again, since in earlier versions of D i eventually had to
deinstall VS2017 and then
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 22:04:11 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
I guess we should keep an eye on this for the next releases,
could you
take care of this Mike?
Take care of what exactly? What specifically needs to be done?
Testing Windows installation of at least the first beta and the
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:00:58 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 3 September 2018 at 15:12, Laurent Tréguier via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:32:29 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code,
it's a reasonable replacement. If
On Monday, September 3, 2018 11:15:03 AM MDT Laurent Tréguier via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> It just baffles me a bit to see the state of D in this
> department, when languages like Go or Rust (hooray for yet
> another comparison to Go and Rust) are a lot younger, but already
> have what looks like
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Most of the work that gets done is the stuff that the folks
contributing think is the most important - frequently what is
most important for them for what they do, and very few (if any)
of the major contributors use or care
On Monday, September 3, 2018 9:41:48 AM MDT Laurent Tréguier via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:23:12 UTC, Chris wrote:
> > On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
> >
> > wrote:
> >> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
> >>>
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:15:15 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1091
As usual, John nails it in a particularly well-written essay.
"ASSERT(expr)
Asserts that an expression is true. The expression may or may
not be evaluated.
If the expression is true,
On 3 September 2018 at 18:07, RhyS via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> Too much resources split among too many distributions, graphical desktops
> etc. Choice is good but too much choice means projects are starved for
> resources, comparability are issues, bugs are even more present, ...
>
> A good
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:41:48 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
Yes. It almost sounds like a smooth experience would be a bad
thing to have, especially with the classic "you don't need an
IDE anyway" speech. Editing experience seems often dismissed as
unimportant, when it's one of the
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:23:12 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
[...]
D has never been about smooth experiences! That's a
commercial benefit if you think that hormesis
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:48:27 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 9/1/2018 5:25 AM, tide wrote:
and that all bugs can be solved with asserts
I never said that, not even close.
Are you in large implying it.
But I will maintain that DVD players still hanging on a
scratched DVD after 20
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
[...]
D has never been about smooth experiences! That's a commercial
benefit if you think that hormesis brings benefits and you are
not looking for programmers of
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:08:57 UTC, agorkvmh wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:00:33 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:00:23 UTC, agorkvmh wrote:
[...]
Yes. Put a pragma where you static assert for Foo(1).pos
equality with 2:
[...]
Thanks, by the way,
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:00:33 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:00:23 UTC, agorkvmh wrote:
[...]
Yes. Put a pragma where you static assert for Foo(1).pos
equality with 2:
[...]
Thanks, by the way, the autocomplete suggests me '__ctfeWrite',
what is it?
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:00:23 UTC, agorkvmh wrote:
There is a way to do print the two values at compile time?
Yes. Put a pragma where you static assert for Foo(1).pos equality
with 2:
--
static assert(Foo(1).pos == 2);
pragma(msg, Foo(1).pos);
struct Foo
{
this(int i)
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 12:07:17 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
That's why the people that adopt D will inordinately be
principals not agents in the beginning. They will either be
residual claimants on earnings or will have
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 12:07:17 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
That's why the people that adopt D will inordinately be
principals not agents in the beginning. They will either be
residual claimants on earnings or will have
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:00:58 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
GDC is kept in sync with dmd nightlies on a weekly or
twice-weekly basis.
I saw the post about using the 2.081 frontend, but I didn't know
about that. That's great, thanks for the info !
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 13:52:24 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 13:39:25 UTC, agorkvmh wrote:
[...]
It prints 1, because pragma(msg) is called when the compiler is
analyzing the code through the semantic process and not when
the body of the function is executed
On 3 September 2018 at 15:12, Laurent Tréguier via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:32:29 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>>
>> Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code, it's a
>> reasonable replacement. If you're optimizing, you should only be using LDC
>> or gdc.
>
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 22:38:46 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
You can strip off any attribute with SetFunctionAttributes:
import std.stdio;
// Adapted from std.traits.SetFunctionAttributes documentation
import std.traits;
auto assumeNoGC(T)(T t)
if (isFunctionPointer!T || isDelegate!T)
On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 12:45 +, Andrea Fontana via Digitalmars-d-
learn wrote:
> […]
>
> I use dpp to generate d code to import:
> - Create a temp.dpp file with #include inside
> - Run "d++ --preprocess-only temp.dpp"
>
> Now you have your .d file exactly like in dstep.
>
So where does this
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 13:39:25 UTC, agorkvmh wrote:
Hi all,
Running this:
---
static assert(Foo(1).pos == 2);
struct Foo
{
this(int i){ advance(); }
size_t pos =1;
void advance()
{
pragma(msg, pos);
pos = pos+1;
pragma(msg, pos);
}
}
dmd
Hi all,
Running this:
---
static assert(Foo(1).pos == 2);
struct Foo
{
this(int i){ advance(); }
size_t pos =1;
void advance()
{
pragma(msg, pos);
pos = pos+1;
pragma(msg, pos);
}
}
dmd -o- -unittest source/pgs/parser.d
1LU
1LU
---
The static
On Friday, 31 August 2018 at 09:59:20 UTC, Dukc wrote:
For me, it seems that for generality you should always add ref
into foreach loop variable. The reason is this:
One good reason:
https://forum.dlang.org/thread/dlhrrgvzmhladnphi...@forum.dlang.org
For anyone that wants to try to reproduce it, you can clone this
repo and switch to the meson branch:
https://github.com/bilelmoussaoui/tilix
Myself and some others are looking at replacing autotools in
Tilix with meson for the various Linux distros to use when
building and packaging the binary. However we are running into an
issue with meson around the use of the "-L--export-dynamic" flag.
When compiling with meson using LDC and
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:32:29 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code,
it's a reasonable replacement. If you're optimizing, you should
only be using LDC or gdc.
What if you want to reproduce a bug that only happens when
compiling with dmd for
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:29:02 UTC, Pjotr Prins wrote:
One thing I want to add that we ought to be appreciative of the
work people put in - much of it in their spare time. I wonder
if W and others sometimes despair for the lack of
appreciation they get. Guido van Rossum burning out
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:00:06 UTC, Thomas Mader wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 00:52:39 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
There are generally two classic approaches to error handling:
std::expected is not the only thing on this topic going on in
C++.
There is also the proposal
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:49:41 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
To me, the only acceptable choices are for `Expected!void` to
have the same lazy semantics as `Expected!T`, or for
`Expected!void` to be removed altogether. Having one
specialization be lazy and one be eager would be a nightmare
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 10:50:17 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
Interesting alternative to DStep. I came to D to avoid
#include, but… I'll give it a whirl once I can get it compiled
on Debian Sid. It seems the libclang-dev package does not
install a libclang.so symbolic link, you have to be
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 11:32:32 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
I think that his point was more that it's sometimes argued that
software engineering really isn't engineering in the classical
sense. If you're talking about someone like a civil engineer
for instance, the engineer applies
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:29:02 UTC, Pjotr Prins wrote:
Hear, hear!
Even though some languages like Julia, Rust and Go are much
better funded than D - and their creators have excellent taste
in different ways - they still have to go through similar
evolutionary steps. There is no
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 12:07:17 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
That's why the people that adopt D will inordinately be
principals not agents in the beginning. They will either be
residual claimants on earnings or will have acquired the
authority to make decisions without persuading a
On Sun, 2018-09-02 at 21:54 +, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d-
learn wrote:
> On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 17:49:45 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> >
[…]
> > Now to work out how to make the project auto generate this D
> > module so as to avoid having it in the repository, and
> >
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:09:44 UTC, Andrey wrote:
Hello,
Here is a code with comments: https://run.dlang.io/is/BNl2Up.
I don't understand how to pass lambda into template.
I get an error:
onlineapp.d(18): Error: template instance `qwerty!((i) => "arg"
~ i.to!string ~ "[0] == '?'",
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7390
John Colvin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||john.loughran.colvin@gmail.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19213
Issue ID: 19213
Summary: goto skips declaration of variable in
std.algorithm.iteration.joiner
Product: D
Version: D2
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 02:35, Joakim via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:21:21 UTC, bauss wrote:
> > On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:52:18 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> >> On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>
> >> What specifically do you
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:21:21 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:52:18 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
[...]
What specifically do you want to cross-compile to, something
like Windows to macOS? LDC already does all
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:52:18 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a
definitive reference.
It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD
to be a
cross-compiler.
A
Hello,
Here is a code with comments: https://run.dlang.io/is/BNl2Up.
I don't understand how to pass lambda into template.
I get an error:
onlineapp.d(18): Error: template instance `qwerty!((i) => "arg"
~ i.to!string ~ "[0] == '?'", "||")` cannot use local __lambda1
as parameter to non-global
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 01:40, Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
> > I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a
> > definitive reference.
> >
> > It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD
> >
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:26:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Well, if that were the intention, then -release could not
remove assertions from @safe code. -release does not remove
bounds checking from @safe code. You have to use
-boundscheck=off to disable assertions in @safe code
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a
definitive reference.
It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD
to be a
cross-compiler.
A few version() statements could be runtime if's, and that's
n Monday, September 3, 2018 12:39:17 AM MDT Neia Neutuladh via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 04:43:30 UTC, bauss wrote:
> > On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 20:01:08 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
> >
> > wrote:
> >> On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 19:42:20 UTC, bauss wrote:
> >>> Woud
On 03/09/2018 7:38 PM, Chris Katko wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:28:38 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:25:23 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 03:19:39 UTC, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 03:04:57 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
This
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 07:38:51 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:28:38 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:25:23 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 03:19:39 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 03:04:57 UTC,
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:28:38 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:25:23 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 03:19:39 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 03:04:57 UTC, Chris Katko
wrote:
This should be simple? All I want to do is load
On 03/09/2018 7:05 PM, Joakim wrote:
One of the root causes of that dysfunction is there's way too much
software written. Open source has actually helped alleviate this,
because instead of every embedded or server developer who needs an OS
kernel convincing management that they should write
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 19:30:58 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
On 09/02/2018 05:43 AM, Joakim wrote:
Most will be out of business within a decade or two, as online
learning takes their place.
I kinda wish I could agree with that, but schools are too much
of a sacred cow to be
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 04:49:40 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
Note that the above has *nothing* to do with retrieving a
value. Retrieving a value is merely used by the implementation
as a trigger to lazily decide whether the caller wants `foo` or
`tryFoo`. Going out of scope
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:39:17 UTC, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 04:43:30 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 20:01:08 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 19:42:20 UTC, bauss wrote:
Woud be so much more maintainable if I could
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 04:43:30 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 20:01:08 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 19:42:20 UTC, bauss wrote:
Woud be so much more maintainable if I could have each
statement into a variable that could be maintained
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
