On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 6:15 PM, bearophile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Baxter:
>> Exactly. That's why I haven't spent too much time benchmarking it.
>> It would be quite surprising if something I wrote in D outperformed
>> the ATLAS SSE3 optimized BLA
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Ary Borenszweig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jarrett Billingsley escribió:
>>
>> Once upon a time, D did not have string mixins, or CTFE, or templates,
>> or any of the fun things we have today. Even so, it was still
>> important to be able to access some informat
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is also one other benefit to min and max (and others) being first
> class properties. You can mimic their behavior in user-defined types. For
> example, if int.min is changed to traits(min, int) or even int.
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 6:05 AM, dfgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Warning: this would break existing code.
>
> I have an idea for a completely new template syntax that is easier to use and
> implement. I'll explain it in therms of a hypothetical language called
> Dscript. Let's start by imaginin
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 7:15 AM, dfgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BCS Wrote:
>
>> Please repost as plain text.
>>
>>
>
> It is plain text. Do you mean a .txt?
Looked fine over here. The only thing odd about the formatting is
there are no line breaks.
But anyway you posted from the web-news inter
"""
There are a number of C/C++ interpreters that support a subset of C++,
but the new C++Script language by Calum Grant, does something a little
different. It enhances C++ with a garbage collector, closures, and
dynamic typing, while using existing C++ compilers.
"""
http://dobbscodetalk.com/index
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 6:40 AM, Jarrett Billingsley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 4:19 PM, llee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Is is possible to index the elements within a tuple using strings?
>> Something similar to the way that associative arrays allow elements to be
>> ind
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 9:39 AM, bearophile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Baxter:
>> Tuples have an annoying "auto-flattening" behavior which means that
>> it's difficult to create very advanced data structures out of them.
>
> This has to change in
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:14 AM, BCS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Reply to Bill,
>
>> Isn't there an easier way to fake it using structs? Like
>> template Tuple(T...) { alias T Tuple }
>> struct STuple(T...) { alias T tuple; }
>> alias Tuple!(STuple(int,float), STuple(string,double), int, creal)
>>
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:01 PM, bearophile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Baxter:
>> and I implemented it again this morning.
>
> I presume my version is "better" :-)
> I have written it along one year of time.
I'm sure if you have spent that much time o
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:26 PM, bearophile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Baxter:
>
>>What about Perl shows that auto-flattening is bad?<
>
>
> You can find a note here:
> http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ancient-languages-perl
>>
> Larry decided
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Nick Sabalausky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "bearophile" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> - I know it's not necessary, just as closures aren't necessary in an OO
>> language,
>> because you can create a class every time you may want a
Does anyone know off the top of their head if code like this allocates
or not with current DMD 1.x compilers?
foreach(x; [1, 2, 3, 4])
{
// do something non-allocating with x
}
And is the answer different if the values are only known at runtime? Like here:
void a func(int a1, int a2, int a
Sounds pretty close to my thoughts on the subject.
A couple of years ago I decided that I was really tired of fighting
with with C++ (mostly the memory micro-management, the horrible
template mess, and totally unreadable code in standard libs like Boost
and STL). So I decided to find something ea
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:07 AM, bearophile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Baxter:
>
>>It was sitting down and realizing that with OCaml I was basically going to
>>have to re-learn how to do everything I already knew how to do, but using
>>Monads or whatever.<
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Sergey Gromov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fri, 5 Dec 2008 03:58:39 +0900, Bill Baxter wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know off the top of their head if code like this allocates
>> or not with current DMD 1.x compilers?
>>
>> foreach
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Walter Bright
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone know off the top of their head if code like this allocates
>> or not with current DMD 1.x compilers?
>>
>> foreach(x; [1, 2, 3, 4])
>> {
This topic came up (again) fairly recently, and a solution was
proposed, but I found a case where that solution doesn't work.
The objective is to do a static check to see if something is callable
with particular argument types, and if so call it.
The proposed solution was to use '.init' like so:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Christian Kamm
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This topic came up (again) fairly recently, and a solution was
>> proposed, but I found a case where that solution doesn't work.
>>
>> The objective is to do a static check to see if something is callable
>> with particula
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Jarrett Billingsley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Daniel White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi Brad,
>> Good point I guess. While it's nice to have centralization for a forum's
>> posts, the kind of centralization you're talking about
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Walter Bright
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Fraser wrote:
>>
>> There are a lot of great language features, but C# and D are starting to
>> look like monsters with their "everything in the kitchen sink" approach
>> (c.f. C++). In Java, there's usually one way
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 9:44 AM, BCS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Reply to bearophile,
>
>> Tim M:
>>
>>> How would that improve on auto?
>>>
>> It's like asking how a domestic Flying Disk UFO can improve your
>> bicycle travels to the nearby milk shop :-)
>>
>> The answer is: it can do that and mu
> So what D has is basically the ability to do type inferences in one
> direction.
To be fair, D can do some other kinds of inference too, as in
selecting template type parameters using IFTI, and inferring which
overload of a function you want based on argument types, and the is()
expression can d
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>>
>>> I think there must be a generation gap here. The first thing I look for
>>> is a
>>> newsgroup dedicated to a subject. After that, a mailing list. I have
>>> basically
>
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 11:21 PM, bearophile wrote:
> Wirbel lets you use an integer a little bit like a list of boolean values
> with the fixed length of 32 or 64. You can used the square brackets to
> directly address the bits:
>
> a = 0
> a[0] = true
> a[2] = false
> print(a)
Nice idea, that
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Michel Fortin
wrote:
> On 2008-12-10 20:17:54 -0500, "Bill Baxter" said:
>
>> someFunction(x, y) {
>>return x+y;
>> }
>>
>> addone(x) {
>>val result; /*inferred-type result (in proposed language)*/
&
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
> Julio César Carrascal Urquijo wrote:
>>
>> "At Google we're always trying to make the web a better platform. That's
>> why we're working on Native Client, a technology that aims to give web
>> developers access to the full power of the client's
Let's say you want to use object composition instead of inheritance.
Now you want to forward half-a-dozen method from the new to class to
the composed class, like so:
class NewClass
{
ImplT implementor;
...
// Do some method forwarding
void func1(int a, float b) { implementor.f
kthx bye.
--bb
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:08:51 +0100, Bill Baxter wrote:
>
>> Let's say you want to use object composition instead of inheritance.
>> Now you want to forward half-a-dozen method from the new to class to
>>
ill dig more.
--bb
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 5:54 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> == Quote from Bill Baxter (wbax...@gmail.com)'s article
>> Let's say you want to use object composition instead of inheritance.
>> Now you want to forward half-a-dozen method from the new t
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:13 AM, Bill Baxter wrote:
> Cool. I don't see anything D2 specific there, so I think it should
> work in D1 ok.
> std.traits.ParameterTypeTuple and std.traits.ReturnType both exist in
> D1, if that's what you were worried about.
>
> I think t
So how fast is dmd -o-? Does this pretty much double the compile time?
An option to reuse a previously generated .deps might be nice.
--bb
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Sergey Gromov wrote:
> After some twitting ;) here's my Windows shell script (a .cmd file)
> which can effectively replace
t, Dec 13, 2008 at 7:07 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Bill Baxter" wrote in message
> news:mailman.162.1229113882.22690.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
>> kthx bye.
>> --bb
>
> I think we need a lolcat pic to go along with this. :)
>
>
>
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Robert Fraser
wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> kthx bye.
>> --bb
>
> LDC can haz.
>
orly?
As in haz them now? or can potentially haz at some point in the future
if someone decides to do it?
--bb
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Christian Kamm
wrote:
>>> LDC can haz.
>>>
>>
>> orly?
>>
>> As in haz them now? or can potentially haz at some point in the future
>> if someone decides to do it?
>
> Can haz now. Currently looking like so
>
> templerror.d(9): Error: identifier 'wrong' is not defi
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Christian Kamm
wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Looks great.
>> Is there a DMD patch for that somewhere in bugzilla?
>
> I sent it directly to Walter a few months ago, but I'll also attach it to
> the enhancement request you just opened.
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 3:07 AM, Jarrett Billingsley
wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Jason House
> wrote:
>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>
>>> I hope bearophile will eventually understand that DMD is not good at
>>> optimizing code, and so comparing its output to GCC's is ultimately
>>
an be left as an exercise for the reader. :-)
--bb
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 3:35 AM, Sergey Gromov wrote:
> Sat, 13 Dec 2008 07:37:18 +0900, Bill Baxter wrote:
>
>> So how fast is dmd -o-? Does this pretty much double the compile time?
>> An option to reuse a previously genera
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 4:41 AM, Don wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> That said, LDC isn't quite there yet, especially on Windows, but it
>> would be very encouraging to see Walter take at least a little
>> interest in it. The transition would be a little painful for
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:13 AM, Christian Kamm
wrote:
>> Speaking of LDC, any chance that the exception handling on Win32 gets
>> fixed in the near future?
>
> No, unfortunately.
>
> It's a problem with LLVM only supporting Dwarf2 exception handling. I'm
> pretty sure it'd work if we used ELF for
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 7:55 AM, aarti_pl wrote:
> Bill Baxter pisze:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:13 AM, Christian Kamm
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of LDC, any chance that the exception handling on Win32 gets
>>>> fixed in the near
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Jason House
wrote:
>
> I couldn't agree more!
>
> I never understood why people were so anti-gdc. I would not be surprised to
> hear that the gdc developer(s) stopped after hearing just how little people
> appreciated their hard work.
>
Well, I think it has mor
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> dsimcha wrote:
>
>> == Quote from Jason House (jason.james.ho...@gmail.com)'s article
>>> I couldn't agree more!
>>> I never understood why people were so anti-gdc. I would not be surprised
>>> to
>> hear that the gdc developer(s) stoppe
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Walter Bright
wrote:
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>
>> Walter is the only one who can make DMD faster, and I think his time
>> is much better spent on designing and maintaining the language. The
>> reference compiler is just supposed to be _correct_, not necessar
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Walter Bright
wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> Of course that back end was also designed for C/C++ originally, right?
>
> Pretty much all of them are.
>
>> But anyway, I agree with bearophile, that requiring too many special
>
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:37 PM, naryl wrote:
>> Anyone have the data for the time required to compile tango with DMD
>> vs LDC? It would be interesting to see how bad the difference is.
>
> Compiling tango-user-{ldc,dmd}
> DMD - 20.950s
> LDC - 34.891s
Thanks for the data. Seems not so bad to
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Walter Bright
wrote:
> Jason House wrote:
>>
>> I have already hit long division related speed issues in my D code.
>> Sometimes simple things can dominate a benchmark, but those same
>> simple things can dominate user code too!
>
> I completely agree, and I'm in t
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Tomas Lindquist Olsen
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I tried this out with Tango + DMD 1.033, Tango + LDC r847 and GCC 4.3.2,
>>> my
>>> timings are as follows, best of three:
>>>
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Denis Koroskin <2kor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:28:16 +0300, Bill Baxter wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>>>
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Don wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, all that said, it's not clear that we really do have that
>> mythical "uber backend" available right now.
>>
>> According to my conversations on the clang mailing list,
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
>> Sounds to me like LDC is already ahead of clang's C++.
>> I actually asked the same question over on the list "could it be that
>> LDC is already the most advanced compiler availble on the LLVM
>> platform?" One guy answered "No, there's ll
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Weed wrote:
> Feature request: Deploying a class instance in the default data segment and
> creation of a class instance at compile time.
>
> In this post I'll try to prove the necessity of this feature.
>
> I have found that in D it is impossible to create a polym
2008/12/18 Weed :
> Bill Baxter пишет:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Weed wrote:
>>>
>>> Feature request: Deploying a class instance in the default data segment
>>> and
>>> creation of a class instance at compile time.
>>>
>
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 11:28 AM, bearophile wrote:
> What's the stance of the D language regarding the "aliasing" problem?
> The last C99 has added a keyword (restrict) to manage this problem (and in
> GCC you can find some nonstandard extensions for C++ too).
>
> See also:
> http://www.cellperf
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Sergey Gromov wrote:
> Fri, 19 Dec 2008 03:56:37 + (UTC), dsimcha wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know of a decent guide that has information on what types of
>> optimizations compilers typically perform and what they aren't capable of
>> performing automatically? I f
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:55 AM, ZHOU Zhenyu wrote:
> I use D to solve the programming problems on projecteuler (
> http://projecteuler.net/ )
>
>
> I thought D should be as fast as C++, but it turns out that sometimes D is
> much slower.
>
> It seems that array would reallocate its memory eve
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Michel Fortin
wrote:
> On 2008-12-19 17:01:48 -0500, "Bill Baxter" said:
>
>> In addition to what other people have said, if you know the length the
>> array will be eventually you can preallocate by doing this:
>>
>> float
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Jarrett Billingsley
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:59 AM, bearophile wrote:
>> Jarrett Billingsley:
>>> I suppose you mean for normal arrays. How about reverse as well?
>>
>> I'd like to see better and faster "reverse" and "sort", but I think they are
>> us
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Jerry Quinn wrote:
> Walter Bright Wrote:
>
>> I've been working on improving the optimizer to take advantage of
>> immutability and purity.
>>
>> http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/7l5x4/optimizing_immutable_and_purity/
>>
>> http://dobbscodetalk.com/ind
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 12:10 PM, bearophile wrote:
> Walter Bright:
>> I didn't know gcc had pure functions. It doesn't have immutable data. If
>> it does optimize with it, you can try it and see!
>
> It seems to work:
> [...]
> As you can see now there's just one call to bar.
>
> Bye,
> bearophi
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 6:08 PM, KennyTM~ wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Jarrett Billingsley
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:59 AM, bearophile
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Jarrett B
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 10:36 PM, bearophile wrote:
> system crashes, which have probably caused a billion dollars of pain and
> damage in the last forty years. In recent years, a number of program
> analysers like PREfix and PREfast in Microsoft have been used to check
> references, and give
On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 5:30 AM, Walter Bright
wrote:
> What platforms for dmd would you be most interested in using?
mac osx 32 bit intel
If I can only vote for one that would be my pick.
--bb
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 9:42 AM, The Anh Tran wrote:
> aarti_pl wrote:
>>
>> Andrei Alexandrescu pisze:
>> > We're trying to make that work. D is due for an operator overhaul.
>> >
>> > Andrei
>>
>> Is there any chance that we get possibility to overload "raw operators",
>> like in C++? I think
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 8:37 PM, Walter Bright
wrote:
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>
>> 2. I have absolutely zero interest in 64-bit. To the people annoyed at the
>> limitations of the 32-bit address space: What in the world are you working
>> on? Non-linear video editors and 3D modeling packages?
>
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Jarrett Billingsley
wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 2:31 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
> wrote:
For iterators, increment is quite different from
addition of an arbitrary number, so what D managed to do was effectively
to
cripple iterators. The stan
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> Stewart Gordon wrote:
>>
>> So, is complex scheduled for removal from Fortran?
>
> Fortran has too little support for abstraction to accommodate complex as a
> user-defined type gainfully. It also has a great deal of legacy code to
> wo
>>I don't think the compiler is quite there yet, so till it is, there is an
>>advantage to having a built-in hash-table that can run at compile time.<
>
> At the moment, what can the compiler do with the built-in AAs at compile
> time? (I think very little).
I don't actually know. I was thinkin
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 12:50 PM, John Reimer wrote:
> I may have actually reached a point where my motivation to upgrade was
> significantly dampened by the fact that PC's technology had finally
> progressed to a more acceptable usability/maintenance levels. Improvements
> in technology seem to
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 1:50 AM, Don wrote:
> There's been some interesting discussion about operator overloading over the
> past six months, but to take the next step, I think we need to ground it in
> reality. What are the use cases?
>
> I think that D's existing opCmp() takes care of the pletho
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Lionello Lunesu
wrote:
> --snip--
All you have to do is pass the -J flag to DMD to indicate the path
where filename.dat lives. import() returns a string (a char[]) but
you can cast it to whatever type you want, like I've casted to byte[]
h
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Don wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>>
>> Jarrett Billingsley:
>>>
>>> His library works by having you write your code in a DSL in strings,
>>> which you pass to the library and then mix in the resulting X86.
>>
>> Have someone some benchmarks that show such Blade give
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 1:50 AM, Don wrote:
> There's been some interesting discussion about operator overloading over the
> past six months, but to take the next step, I think we need to ground it in
> reality. What are the use cases?
>
> I think that D's existing opCmp() takes care of the pletho
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 4:32 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> Don wrote:
>>
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>
>>> Don wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
>
> Don wrote:
>>
>> The creation of temporaries during expressions is something I'm
>> currently working on solving.
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Frits van Bommel
wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> Merging might be useful there too --- A ~= b ~ c ~ d is probably more
>> efficiently implemented as 3 ~= ops.
>
> Actually, it's probably most efficiently implemented as 1 "
2008/12/31 Don :
> Weed wrote:
>>
>> Frits van Bommel пишет:
>>>
>>> Don wrote:
Frits van Bommel wrote:
>
> Don wrote:
>>
>> A straightforward first step would be to state in the spec that "the
>> compiler is entitled to assume that X+=Y yields the same result as
>
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 3:16 AM, bearophile wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>> The name and original implementation of writefln are Walter's and
>> predate my tenure with D. I just defined write() and writeln().
>
> write/writeln are very useful to avoid the silly bugs caused by the possible
> of a
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 5:23 AM, bearophile wrote:
> The first part of this post was posted around October 2 2008, and shows a
> lits of general bugs I have found in DMD/D.
>
> This post lists several problems/bugs/limits I have found in the
> write/writefln of D1.
>
> [...]
> As you can see this
It seems to me that the built-in .sort uses a randomized algorithm
that leads to results that differ from run-to-run when there are
elements with identical keys.
This seems like a bad idea to me for the built-in algorithm to have
non-deterministic behavior because it means you can have bugs that
a
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 12:05 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> == Quote from Bill Baxter (wbax...@gmail.com)'s article
>> It seems to me that the built-in .sort uses a randomized algorithm
>> that leads to results that differ from run-to-run when there are
>> elements with identical
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:10 AM, Weed wrote:
> In that example with matrices
> (http://www.dsource.org/projects/openmeshd/browser/trunk/LinAlg/linalg/MatrixT.d,
> template MultReturnType (ArgT)) the returned type of matrices needed to
> be altered in void (in the pointer on void). And add check by
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 12:16 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> == Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
>> dsimcha wrote:
>> > On another note, it would be nice if std.algorithm implemented a stable
>> > O(N log N)
>> > sort, like a merge sort. Right now, IIRC it uses an in
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Stewart Gordon wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>
>>
>> I think the built-in sort should be some kind of stable sort. Also
>> the stability or lack thereof is not mentioned in the spec, and it
>> probably should be because stabilit
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 6:15 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> == Quote from Bill Baxter (wbax...@gmail.com)'s article
>> Actually, a function to sort multiple arrays in parallel was exactly
>> what I was implementing using .sort. So that doesn't sound like a
>> limitation to me
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 10:18 AM, bearophile wrote:
> Bill Baxter:
>
>>I use this all the time in NumPy in the form of "argsort" which returns a
>>list of indices giving the sort order. That can then be used as to index
>>other arrays (thereby permuting
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Christopher Wright wrote:
> Weed wrote:
>>
>> Who agrees with me? There are still ideas as it is possible to solve
>> this problem and not to destroy language?
>
> When you reply to your reply to your reply to your post and nobody else
> replies to any of your posts
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 4:09 AM, Walter Bright
wrote:
> Ary Borenszweig wrote:
>>
>> I think Bill speaks about a stable sort. You can have an unstable sort
>> algorithm without having explicity a random invocation. Note that he's
>> saying "leads to results that differ from run-to-run when there ar
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Walter Bright
wrote:
> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>>
>>> I keep thinking I should put on a "Compiler Construction" seminar!
>>
>> You should. The academic courses do a good job with theory and
>> general application, but that isn't quite the same as one based on
>> practic
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Walter Bright
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I keep thinking I should put on a "Compil
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:33 AM, bearophile wrote:
> bobef Wrote:
>> The need for this is because often a module happens to be named as the
>> functionality it contains and you have to write the stuff two times.<
>
> A design bug in the D1 module system is that when you import foo normally you
>
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Miles <...@___.> wrote:
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> A property setter is ALWAYS going to return nothing and
>
> Both the getter and the setter should return an rvalue. Properties exist
> so that they are interchangeable with real member variables.
Partly
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 10:23 AM, bearophile wrote:
> Bill Baxter:
>
>>I think this problem you refer to only applies to modules without package
>>names. I.e. "module Foo" containing "class Foo". Things seem to work ok if
>>you have "module x.
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Bill Baxter" wrote in message
> news:mailman.343.1231465331.22690.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Miles <...@___.> wrote:
>>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Miles <...@___.> wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Miles <...@___.> wrote:
>>> Both the getter and the setter should return an rvalue. Properties exist
>>> so that th
Another thread just reminded me of something I use frequently in C++
that doesn't work in D because ++x is not an lvalue:
int x,N;
...
++x %= N;
So is there some deep reason for not making it an lvalue like in C++?
--bb
2009/1/9 Weed :
> Bill Baxter пишет:
>> Another thread just reminded me of something I use frequently in C++
>> that doesn't work in D because ++x is not an lvalue:
>>
>>int x,N;
>> ...
>>++x %= N;
>>
>> So is there some deep reaso
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Weed wrote:
> Bill Baxter пишет:
>> 2009/1/9 Weed :
>>> Bill Baxter пишет:
>>>> Another thread just reminded me of something I use frequently in C++
>>>> that doesn't work in D because ++x is not an lvalue:
&g
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Weed wrote:
> Weed пишет:
>> Bill Baxter пишет:
>>> 2009/1/9 Weed :
>>>> Bill Baxter пишет:
>>>>> Another thread just reminded me of something I use frequently in C++
>>>>> that doesn'
701 - 800 of 855 matches
Mail list logo
