The Rust website says this:
Generic types yes, only simple, non-turing-complete substitution
After seeing that I just assumed the language was worthless and
ignored it.. is there something more to this?
Go looks like a horrible combination of C and Lua, lacking the
speed of C and the power of Lua(and I'd bet LuaJIT beats Go for
performance).
Not all features are equal, for me, meta programming is such a
useful thing that a language better have something damn
impressive to replace it(espec
I'm not convinced D has caught up to C++ yet from a usability
standpoint, as the tools are still quite bad(VisualD -not- fun).
But the other day I tried out MonoD and it shows promise, auto
completion is solid, and it seems to have at least some of the
features I've come to expect from using
I've only recently tried D out, but what I'd like to see..
-GC being truly optional
-being able to specify if the standard library should use GC or
not, perhaps with allocators
-if D is going to have a GC, then a precise, compacting one would
be cool, but not if it gets in the way of making t
The class will still have a vptr. The vtable will contain only
the type info.
No way to disable type info(like in most C++ compilers you can
disable RTTI)? I get that GC might want it, but if I disable GC
why would I want type info?
I saw that D is planning to make the standard containers
C++ "closures" do not allow you to maintain a reference to the
context after the function containing said context returns.
Instead, C++ allows you to choose between copying the variables
into the lambda instance, or referencing them (the references
may not "escape"). The compiler may or may n
D's pass-down lambdas do not need memory allocation. As far as
I remember none of std.algorithm's use of lambda allocates
memory.
Andrei
Oh cool, I like that
I don't really think ref counted struct vs class is fair,
because in reality most containers don't need ref counting. I
can't think of one instance in C++ where I stuck a container
directly in a shared_ptr or anything similar.
Also as far I as I can tell making it a class would bloat it wit
On Wednesday, 21 December 2011 at 12:50:44 UTC, so wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 07:37:33 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
a great mathematician
Name please?
I believe he is referring to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Stepanov
When I go to that link it just says
Unknown Paste ID!
Don't see any code anywhere.. hum
What is wrong with value containers? They work great in C++, a
container is such a basic thing that ref counting and whatnot is
rarely if ever needed, and in the unlikely event you need to
share a co
That Cuda is used more is probably true, OpenCL is fugly C and
no fun.
Microsoft's upcoming C++ AMP looks interesting as it lets you
write GPU and CPU code in C++. The spec is open so hopefully it
becomes common to implement it in other C++ compilers.
SSE intrinsics in C++ are pretty essen
A great IDE is essential for D to really succeed.
Visual D is a solid start but it isn't really usable for a large
project yet.
- The debugging experience is funky, it can't seem to see many
variables
- hovering over variables generally doesn't show anything useful
- hitting . doesn't p
The reason I am conviced is that C++ was the last systems
programming language with manual memory management. All the
languages people are
developing as possible C++ replacement do have some form of
automatic
memory management.
Meanwhile smart pointers and a GC API became part of the C++
la
Indeed. And this is usually just to mitigate the fact that C++
is so crap
at this sort of code. Maybe D will be tolerable, and this
breaking out to
script won't be necessary? (though I'm dubious)
Yeah C++ is a migraine for that type of code:( I think D would
be nicer than C++ for gameplay
That sounds cool, perhaps people can have customizable GC for
specific applications?
Looking forward to D having a precise GC
I like functional languages, but the only one that seems to
have much support is F#.
I've used TBB Flow Graph in C++ and found it to be a major
improvement over straight parallel algorithms/tasks/message
passing etc which seem to be the norm(like in D). Expressing
dependencies between se
One thing I miss, though, is ctags support for D. You don't
know how
powerful such a simple concept is; it lets you navigate
50,000-line
source files without even batting an eyelid. :-) (Just try
that in an
IDE, and you'll soon get an aneurism from trying to scroll with
a
1-pixel high scrol
On Sunday, 13 May 2012 at 19:07:41 UTC, crashtua wrote:
Is it possible to build dll or lib with dmc to use it in
program builded in microsoft c++ compiler?
Yes you can download Visual D, build a D DLL with DMD, and call
it from a Visual C++ program. Unfortunately you have to use C to
commun
HINSTANCE LoadME;
LoadME = LoadLibrary(L"C:\\Users\\CrashTUA\\Documents\\visual
studio
2010\\Projects\\DynamicLib1\\DynamicLib1\\Release\\DynamicLib1.dll");
func dllprintt;
dllprintt = (func)GetProcAddress(LoadME,"trololo");
int i = dllprintt();
return
Like the design, syntax is way better than D
But half of what makes a language are the
compilers/debuggers/tool
* Can you do metaprogramming with nimrod templates? Are they as
powerful as C++/D in this regard? Docs for templates is very
short, making me think you can't do much, but perhaps it just
isn't covered?
*also what is up with lack of unsigned integer types?
*not a big fan of forward declaring
For some reason I found these docs really dull, to much
rehashing of C++ 11 which is old hat now.
The template stuff might be interesting if not for the knowledge
that it will take absolutely forever to compile--
Yes IDE should be built with the language :)
D has bad IDE support that is why I read about D but don't
actually use it...
This seems like a waste of time compared to the other complaints
Manu brought up(bad IDE/debugger support etc.)
You can look at the source for Doom 3, it is written in C with
classes more than C++. But that was years ago, and Carmack has
taken an interest to functional programming so perhaps they are
more up to date nowadays.. although I'm guessing they have a ton
of legacy code written in C style and C w
I do like C++, but every time I look what is happening post
C++11, tend to be glad to spend most of my time in JVM/.NET
land, specially because I deal a lot with teams full of
developers with an average skill set.
--
Paulo
Eh? C++11 makes things easier/better IMO, C++14 also has a few
1. Easy C++ interop(don't want to write C wrappers)
2. An awesome IDE(visual D is not there yet) comparable to Visual
C++ w/ Visual Assist
3. none buggy language implementation
4. Easy to disable GC without breaking everything
GC works for some cases, but the global one size fits all GC
that D uses is no good.
One of my most anticipated C++14 features actually, hope they
don't dawdle too much with the TS it apparently got pushed back
into:(
BigInt n = 100;
n += 10;
++n;
... and both the 2nd and 3rd lines will result in a
reallocation even though there is no need for it, because only
n is referencing the memory it wraps.
Does BigInt not have overloaded operators for adding normal
integers? Is it converting 10 to
bearophile how much do you love haskell
Go is a boring language, kind of like Dart, I guess Google just
sucks at language design? The do use an awful lot of Java,
perhaps it has caused irreparable damage
b) it is impossible to do partial semantic validation of
template body based on concept limitation which is the original
motivating reason behind concept designs in C++ (with no
success so far)
I'm pretty sure I've read that they have it working in a GCC
branch for C++ concepts lite, it do
int len = arr.length;
That isn't an error in D?
Every C++ code base I've worked in enables max warnings/warnings
as errors, this would never compile--
Does it at least trigger a warning?
unable to capture
this...
On Monday, 25 November 2013 at 11:51:22 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Monday, November 25, 2013 12:14:59 froglegs wrote:
>>int len = arr.length;
That isn't an error in D?
Every C++ code base I've worked in enables max
warnings/warnings
as er
On Saturday, 29 March 2014 at 15:37:05 UTC, w0rp wrote:
I agree with Walter about error numbers being a bad idea.
Especially when people prefer the numbers over a description.
MySQL has really turned me off the idea of error numbers. When
I get an error about MySQL syntax, the message actually
Oh you D guys, arguing about enums for 187 posts! Find something
more interesting to talk about, this is boring:(
The only thing about enum class that pisses me off is not being
able to index into an array by default.
Why do they write such important code in C to begin with? C is
garbage compared to C++. With C++ they wouldn't need to drop
down to raw pointers and would never have these problems.
(of course D guys will say use D, but lets be real, D isn't ready
for many obvious reasons)
still
written in C. It makes me sad:(
On Saturday, 12 April 2014 at 22:40:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 10:10:55PM +, froglegs wrote:
Why do they write such important code in C to begin with? C is
garbage compared to C++. With C++ they wouldn't need to drop
d
I know it does, but users employing @nogc still have to manage
memory somehow. Let's add hooks to the runtime and implement
some GC alternatives, and then see what demand is like ;-)
They use noGC and smart pointers/manual ala C++.
You seem to be suggesting that people who don't want GC,
Well, most of the new games (Unity3D) are done in C# nowadays
and people live with it even though game development is one of
the biggest C++ loving and GC hating crowd there is.
Unity3D the engine is written primarily in C++, not C#.
The Unity editor and gameplay code is written in C# because
I am really looking forward to .NET Native becoming widespread.
Then this type of comparisons (C# vs C++) will be quite
different.
I don't think it will make a major difference. Taking a GC based
language and giving it a native compiler doesn't automatically
make it performance competiti
Also possible in C# with structs, interop annotations and
unsafe blocks.
And now you aren't using the language, but a (very) poor subset
of a language that doesn't even support templates.
C++ exposes SSE/AVX intrinsics, C# does not.
That is not correct.
1 - Nowhere in the ANSI/ISO C++
Here is an alternative:
1. classes are unique by default, they cannot be shared. No GC
or RF required, and covers 90% of objects.
2. To share, retype as GC, the requirement being that it does
not have a destructor.
feels like writing C++ with C# syntax.
Ahem. C++ has RAII k thanks. C++ > C# Proof.
I believe Concepts lite in C++ works around this by allowing a
syntax like this:
void foo(InputRange{T} range1, InputRange{T2} range2)
vs.
void foo(InputRange range1, InputRange range2)
If they are the same type.
I believe the objection is that the proposed syntax can't tell
the
differen
46 matches
Mail list logo
