On Monday, 4 July 2016 at 05:08:34 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
On 07/04/2016 01:20 AM, Hiemlick Hiemlicker wrote:
I have thread. It locks up. If I changed from a bool val it is
using
from shared to __gshared it works. I checked the address
inside and
outside of the thread and they are different for
version(Windows)
void main()
{
import std.random;
while(getchar() != EOF)
{
auto x = new int[std.random.uniform(100, 1000)];
writeln("");
bThread.Now();
}
}
more or less, ends up with a huge
On Monday, 4 July 2016 at 01:36:00 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Sunday, 3 July 2016 at 23:20:35 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
The only difference is that the thread is a windows
CreateThread. I guess D doesn't know about such threads and
hence shared doesn't extend across to them?
The
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 08:02:30 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 01:20:35 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
public struct Foo
{
public void Create(T)(uint delegate(T) c, T param)
{
}
}
Foo f;
f.Create((x) { }, "asdf");
cannot deduce
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 01:51:03 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
Couple of things could be happening.
1) Alignments are off, aligning of data really really matters
Where? I rewrote the code to use size_t and same problem. If
alignments were off chances are it wouldn't exhibit the issues in
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 03:54:26 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 00:08:10 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
I use a struct with static members so I do not have to
instantiate it. It is essentially a singleton. I want all the
variables to be __gshared. I guess I have
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 00:29:45 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 00:05:14 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
Is there a way to write a wrapper around such that
mystring s = "a string that will be converted and not appear
in binary";
writeln(s);
You just need to put a
On Saturday, 25 June 2016 at 17:52:48 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
On Saturday, 25 June 2016 at 17:26:03 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
On Saturday, 25 June 2016 at 16:05:30 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
On Saturday, 25 June 2016 at 13:44:48 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
Does D/Phobos has any support for thunks?
The following code works on dmd x64. Fails on dmd x32 and ldc
x64. The problem is the passed variable.
import std.stdio;
version (Windows)
{
import core.sys.windows.windows;
void makeExecutable(ubyte[] code)
{
DWORD old;
VirtualProtect(code.ptr, code.length,
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 00:39:57 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 at 00:05:14 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 23:55:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 23:23:19 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
I've tried playing with opCall,
public struct Foo
{
public void Create(T)(uint delegate(T) c, T param)
{
}
}
Foo f;
f.Create((x) { }, "asdf");
cannot deduce arguments compiler error.
Surely D can figure out that T is a string?
If one simply changes this to
public struct Foo(T)
{
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 23:55:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 23:23:19 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
ok. For some reason I thought CTFE's applied to normal
functions but I realize that doesn't make a lot of sense.
It is applied to normal functions, just when they
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 23:36:35 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 23:26:19 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 23:03:17 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 22:47:21 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
Ok, Does that mean
void main()
{
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 23:03:17 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 22:47:21 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
what exactly does this do? are all members _gshared?
In this case __gshared is a complete NOOP. __gshared has only
an effect on variables. It prevents them to reside in
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 22:56:48 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 22:23:23 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
I know this is probably a lot to ask for an many won't see the
point, but a secure program should not expose readable
strings, it makes it far too easy for the attacker
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 22:55:21 UTC, qznc wrote:
On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 22:23:23 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
It seems D won't replace
encrypt("This string will still end up in the binary");
with "skadf2903jskdlfaos;e;fo;aisjdfja;soejfjjfjfjfjfjfeij" or
whatever the ctfe value of
what exactly does this do? are all members _gshared?
I know this is probably a lot to ask for an many won't see the
point, but a secure program should not expose readable strings,
it makes it far too easy for the attacker to see what is going on.
Is it possible to encrypt every static string in D and decrypt
before it is output in an automatic
On Tuesday, 11 June 2013 at 12:13:05 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 June 2013 at 03:08:36 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
Yea, that's the idea here. Like Simen said, if these were
errors, your program wouldn't even start, so noop is better.
Though gc_init should call thread_init,
On Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 18:59:19 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
I was playing around with some Eponymous Templates. I had been
under the impression that Implicit Function-Template
Instantiation (IFTI) meant that you don't have to explicitly
instantiate all functions. However, it seems like there are
Is it possible to add a hook to every function
call/delegate/lambda both start and end?
What about the ability to essentially log a programs execution
path, then "play it back" and only view the source code one is
interested in along with the state at any moment in time. Similar
to debugging
On Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 04:34:26 UTC, Chang Long wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 03:11:52 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
test(myEnum.A | myEnum.B & myEnum.C).
I like this:
myEnum.( A | B & C) == myEnum.A | myEnum.B & myEnum.C
Does that even work? Regardless, You still have
On Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 03:50:35 UTC, Carl Vogel wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 03:11:52 UTC, Hiemlick Hiemlicker
wrote:
Suppose one has void test(myEnum e)
enum myEnum
{
A,B,C
}
[...]
Doesn't the with statement solve your problem here?
with (myEnum) {
test(A);
test(B);
Suppose one has void test(myEnum e)
enum myEnum
{
A,B,C
}
It would be very cool if we could do
test(A) instead of test(myEnum.A).
by context, the compiler can look first in the scope for
something named A then look in the enum itself and prepend myEnum
internally.
For flags, it would
On Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 02:24:55 UTC, captaindet wrote:
is there an alignment guarantee for core.stdc.stdlib.malloc?
more specifically, using DMD and compiling for 32bit on
windows, can i assume proper alignment for int or uint
variables?
background: i like to re-use a (ubyte) buffer,
Many memory management routines allocate 2x the required capacity
on overflow and and de-allocate when the array is 1/2 used.
This method is inefficient and wastes up to 100% of the actually
memory required, although some on average is is probably much
lower than this.
I am thinking it
26 matches
Mail list logo
