Re: Javascript bytecode

On Thursday, 20 December 2012 at 01:41:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 12/19/2012 4:54 PM, Rob T wrote: One question I have for you, is what percentage performance gain can you expect to get by using a well chosen bytecode-like language verses interpreting directly from source code? I know o

Re: Social comments integrated with dlang.org

On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 at 18:06:00 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: In any case, we're D, we're systems/native, I think we can do much better than Disqus, and I submit Vibe.d/DFeed/etc as evidence that settling for Disqus is below us. So, livefyre then? ;) Agree with Nick and Vladimir fwiw,

Re: D based BEEP library?

On Saturday, 5 January 2013 at 19:54:11 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: In other words, bad marketing. Unfortunate, since it sounds like a good idea upon my first glance of it (aside from its choice to use XML for certain things, which IMO is too much of an _unnecessary_ baggage for something as l

Re: D based BEEP library?

On Saturday, 5 January 2013 at 09:56:01 UTC, Robert M. Münch wrote: SPDY is more like an enhanced-HTML. So it's clearly trageted at browser and the web. I think you mean "enhanced HTTP," as SPDY will be the first draft for HTTP 2.0: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2012OctDec

Re: D popularity

On Monday, 21 January 2013 at 21:27:54 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: If text editors written in JavaScript have become commonplace (Thanks, Google!), I'm sure JS-based interpreters, JS-based codecs and "F"FTs (rather SFTs), and other such nonsense aren't far behind. You probably already saw thes

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Friday, 16 August 2013 at 12:36:39 UTC, Wyatt wrote: On Thursday, 15 August 2013 at 18:35:22 UTC, Joakim wrote: I've only done X11 forwarding over ssh, both WAN and LAN, it was incredibly laggy in both cases. As Andrei and I have pointed out, NX does a much better job of things

Re: Replacing std.xml

On Thursday, 29 August 2013 at 07:47:35 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: There are several D XML libraries floating around, but no one has taken the time to get any of the prepared for the Phobos review queue, and I suspect that very few of them are range-based like the Phobos XML solution needs to

Re: Replacing std.xml

On Thursday, 29 August 2013 at 11:14:21 UTC, Chris wrote: On Thursday, 29 August 2013 at 09:24:31 UTC, Joakim wrote: I think it's great that there's no std.xml, as it implies that nobody using D would use a dumb tech like XML. Let's keep it that way. :) No way around XML.

Re: d from the outside

On Sunday, 1 September 2013 at 18:43:05 UTC, Ramon wrote: While I'm absolutely not sure that Go is a good language to learn for a programming newbie, I'm pretty sure that D isn't. Don't get me wrong, D is a great language (why else would I be here?), but in my minds eye (some will strongly oppos

Re: d from the outside

On Monday, 2 September 2013 at 13:40:25 UTC, Chris wrote: On Sunday, 1 September 2013 at 23:47:09 UTC, Joakim wrote: The key is probably getting some popular apps built in D, where the developers rave about how D helped them get their work done better and faster. I am not aware of such

Re: Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

While there has been a lot of back and forth with Manu in this thread, I think it's best to look at his game jam experience as a kind of stress test for D installation and usage, ie informative but extreme. Game development, especially in a rush and with everything being installed automaticall

Re: Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

On Tuesday, 3 September 2013 at 13:25:44 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Monday, 2 September 2013 at 17:39:45 UTC, Joakim wrote: The usual open source zealots argued with me, suggesting that any closed source reference implementation would be unwelcome, even if always accompanied by an open source

Re: Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

On Monday, 2 September 2013 at 23:28:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2013 1:11 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: That was in reply to if DMD was built as a library and included in the IDE. Then there wouldn't be a process to end. Ah, I see. But that does bring up the possibility of running dmd f

Re: Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

On Tuesday, 3 September 2013 at 15:45:48 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Tuesday, 3 September 2013 at 15:34:31 UTC, Joakim wrote: On Tuesday, 3 September 2013 at 13:25:44 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Monday, 2 September 2013 at 17:39:45 UTC, Joakim wrote: The usual open source zealots argued with me

Re: Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

On Tuesday, 3 September 2013 at 21:34:42 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 09/03/2013 06:33 PM, Joakim wrote: Sure, but I did provide demonstration, that thread. That thread seems to demonstrate a failure of communication. By whom? It's pretty obviously the zealots. They have decided that

Re: Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

On Wednesday, 4 September 2013 at 13:23:19 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 09/04/2013 11:26 AM, Joakim wrote: On Tuesday, 3 September 2013 at 21:34:42 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: On 09/03/2013 06:33 PM, Joakim wrote: Sure, but I did provide demonstration, that thread. That thread seems to demonstrate

Re: Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

On Tuesday, 3 September 2013 at 04:29:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2013 6:13 PM, deadalnix wrote: Unless the industry is showing signs of understanding, I'm done with theses stuffs. When amateurs can do better for free, you are not providing any service, you are just scamming your custo

Re: new DIP47: Outlining member functions of aggregates

On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 04:32:36 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote: "Walter Bright" wrote in message news:l0fm2o$2uat$1...@digitalmars.com... Outlining of member functions is the practice of placing the declaration of a member function in the struct/class/union, and placing the definition of it

Re: Zimbu

On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 13:32:52 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote: On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 11:39:28 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote: Am 15.09.2013 08:54, schrieb Nick Sabalausky: But I could swear I've seen a "LLVM IR -> C" before... I'm pretty sure that IR -> C just outputs C code that fe

Re: Will Java go native?

On Thursday, 19 September 2013 at 08:26:03 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: Java is no longer under-performant compared to C, C++, Fortran, D, Go, Rust. Check the benchmarks. Interesting. Java people have been saying this for years and it's never been quite true, so I just looked up the benchmark sho

Re: dub: should we make it the de jure package manager for D?

On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 20:48:58 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: We've been experimenting with http://code.dlang.org for a while and things are going well. In particular Sönke has been very active about maintaining and improving it, which brings further confidence in the future of the

Re: Heads up, g++ in Xcode 5 points to Clang

On Monday, 28 October 2013 at 15:49:41 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 28/10/13 14:22, evilrat wrote: sure, but i would prefer LLVM license over GCC if i were in Apple dev team(and that what they did). also LLVM is quite young, so who knows what people contribute to it in near future...

Re: Heads up, g++ in Xcode 5 points to Clang

On Monday, 28 October 2013 at 18:34:11 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 28/10/13 18:33, Joakim wrote: Do you have any evidence that they've exerted "proprietary control" over llvm, say by adding closed modules to their compiler? I understand how you could interpret it t

Re: Everyone who writes safety critical software should read this

On Tuesday, 29 October 2013 at 22:20:08 UTC, Chris wrote: On Tuesday, 29 October 2013 at 21:39:59 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 10/29/2013 2:38 PM, Walter Bright wrote: I wrote one for DDJ a few years back, "Safe Systems from Unreliable Parts". It's probably scrolled off their system. http:/

Re: ARM bare-metal programming in D

On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 03:07:02 UTC, evilrat wrote: (from what i already know from forums) On Monday, 21 October 2013 at 23:43:45 UTC, Mike wrote: Language Questions: 2. If not ARM Cortex, can any of the D compilers target Intel's Quark processor? ummm... is this x86 right? so what

Re: BSD Config

On Sunday, 10 November 2013 at 19:09:37 UTC, Tyro[17] wrote: On 11/10/13, 12:16 PM, nazriel wrote: On Sunday, 10 November 2013 at 16:49:18 UTC, Tyro[17] wrote: What is the proper way to configure DMD for use on BSD systems? [Snip] Try running it with gmake Ok... Thanks for the pointer. I

Re: BSD Config

On Sunday, 10 November 2013 at 16:49:18 UTC, Tyro[17] wrote: This happened on OpenBSD, FreeBSD and DragonFlyBSD. I am running the 64bit version of all these operating systems. Which actually might be the problem now that I think about it. Does DMD even support the 64bit version of Free/OpenBSD

Re: BSD Config

On Monday, 11 November 2013 at 17:35:29 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote: On 11/11/13 8:15 AM, Joakim wrote: On Sunday, 10 November 2013 at 16:49:18 UTC, Tyro[17] wrote: This happened on OpenBSD, FreeBSD and DragonFlyBSD. I am running the 64bit version of all these operating systems. Which actually

Re: BSD Config

On Monday, 11 November 2013 at 18:02:18 UTC, Tyro[17] wrote: Reason... I had every intention of volunteering to become the so called build master for DMD. I thought it a bit presumptuous to do such a thing without actually knowing how to build the compiler on the supported platforms. I'm using

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 00:18:50 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: On 11/14/2013 05:14 PM, Kai Nacke wrote: But this is only half of the story. My target is Linux/ARM which is already supported by druntime/phobos. If you target a smartphone then you also have to add Android or iOS support to dru

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 07:22:07 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 06:18:00 UTC, Joakim wrote: As Kai says, has anyone worked on getting D running on Android before? I've been thinking about attempting an Android port for years. I thought I'd spin up so

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 08:54:21 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 08:24:55 UTC, Joakim wrote: Would it make sense to use dmd for linux/x86 to cross-compile to Android/x86 or is this a job for ldc/gdc only? I would say ldc/gdc only, as LLVM/gcc are the supported

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 09:45:42 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: As far as I know dmd does not support cross compiling. I started skimming the dmd source to see how it handled porting to new platforms and I found the following: * Linux Version * - * There are two main issues: hos

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 12:07:19 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 09:20:18 UTC, Joakim wrote: For one, dmd not having an ARM backend doesn't impact me since I'm targeting Android/x86 for now, :) as stated earlier. Interesting, then you'll mostly fo

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 18:44:20 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote: On 15 November 2013 18:40, Joakim wrote: Yes, I thought that would be easier, to split the effort into two parts. First, get D working on Android/x86, then, linux/ARM. Some fine day, we combine the two into Android/ARM

Re: Building druntime on MAC OS X

On Saturday, 16 November 2013 at 03:50:25 UTC, evilrat wrote: On Saturday, 16 November 2013 at 03:20:03 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote: I am having little problem building druntime on Mac OS X 10.9 (Mavericks) and am wondering if anyone has experienced with this and some guidance on how to fix it.

Re: Building druntime on MAC OS X

On Saturday, 16 November 2013 at 20:25:01 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Saturday, 16 November 2013 at 06:47:39 UTC, Joakim wrote: The recent switch to clang on 10.9 as the reason seemed to make sense, as I've run into a similar issue with clang before. But after googling a little bit and lo

D tech talk at RIT

I just stumbled across this tech talk, done for a student organization at RIT almost a year ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2pEda2b8Cc I thought the kid did a good job of introducing D by comparing it to existing languages, then going off on some D-specific features. The Q&A session at

Re: The best video to introduce D

I'm partial to the Google tech talk Andrei gave almost three years ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlVpPstLPEc I thought Andrei did a great job with his presentation in that talk. For an article, Walter's Dr. Dobbs piece on component programming is a great intro to language, showing the

Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 09:49:40 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: toUpper/lower cannot be made in place if it should handle all Unicode. Some characters will change their length when convert to/from uppercase. Examples of these are the German double S and some Turkish I. This triggered a long-sta

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 17:43:03 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote: Simple: backwards compatibility with all ASCII APIs (e.g. most C libraries), and because I don't want my strings to consume multiple bytes per character when I don't need it. And yet here we are today, where an early decision made so

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 20:37:58 UTC, Joakim wrote: 3. Even if I have a string that is 99% ASCII then I have to pay extra bytes for every character just because 1% wasn't ASCII. With UTF-8, I only pay the extra bytes when needed. I don't understand what you mean here. If your st

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 21:21:27 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: You seem to think that not only UTF-8 is bad encoding but also one unified encoding (code-space) is bad(?). Yes, on the encoding, if it's a variable-length encoding like UTF-8, no, on the code space. I was originally going to title

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 22:44:24 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: I remember those bad ole days of gratuitously-incompatible encodings. I wish those days will never ever return again. You'd get a text file in some unknown encoding, and the only way to make any sense of it was to guess what encoding it

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 01:58:41 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: One of the first, and best, decisions I made for D was it would be Unicode front to back. That is why I asked this question here. I think D is still one of the few programming languages with such unicode support. This is more a pr

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 07:48:05 UTC, Diggory wrote: I think you are a little confused about what unicode actually is... Unicode has nothing to do with code pages and nobody uses code pages any more except for compatibility with legacy applications (with good reason!). Incorrect. "Unicode

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 08:42:46 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I think you stand alone in your desire to return to code pages. Nobody is talking about going back to code pages. I'm talking about going to single-byte encodings, which do not imply the problems that you had with code pages way ba

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 08:58:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: Another thing I noticed: sometimes when you think you really need to operate on individual characters (and that your code will not be correct unless you do that), the assumption will be incorrect due to the existence of combini

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 10:33:12 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: You don't need to do that to slice a string. I think you mean to say that you need to decode each character if you want to slice the string at the N-th code point? But this is exactly what I'm trying to point out: how would you

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 12:26:47 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 11:07:54 UTC, Joakim wrote: If you want to split a string by ASCII whitespace (newlines, tabs and spaces), it makes no difference whether the string is in ASCII or UTF-8 - the code will behave

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 14:18:32 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 13:47:42 UTC, Joakim wrote: Are you sure _you_ understand it properly? Both encodings have to check every single character to test for whitespace, but the single-byte encoding simply has to load

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 17:03:43 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: 25-May-2013 10:44, Joakim пишет: Yes, on the encoding, if it's a variable-length encoding like UTF-8, no, on the code space. I was originally going to title my post, "Why Unicode?" but I have no real problem

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 18:09:26 UTC, Diggory wrote: On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 08:07:42 UTC, Joakim wrote: On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 07:48:05 UTC, Diggory wrote: I think you are a little confused about what unicode actually is... Unicode has nothing to do with code pages and nobody

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 19:03:53 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: You can map a codepage to a subset of UCS :) That's what they do internally anyway. If I take you right you propose to define string as a header that denotes a set of windows in code space? I still fail to see how that would scal

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 19:30:25 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On the other hand, Joakim even admits his single byte encoding is variable length, as otherwise he simply dismisses the rarely used (!) Chinese, Japanese, and Korean languages, as well as any text that contains words from more than

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 18:56:42 UTC, Diggory wrote: "limited success of UTF-8" Becoming the de-facto standard encoding EVERYWERE except for windows which uses UTF-16 is hardly a failure... So you admit that UTF-8 isn't used on the vast majority of computers since the inception of Unicode.

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

It is the norm more than the exception in most of the world. I disagree, but in any case, most of this thread refers to multi-language strings. The argument is about how best to encode them. On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 20:47:25 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote: On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 14:58:02

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

For some reason this posting by H. S. Teoh shows up on the mailing list but not on the forum. On Sat May 25 13:42:10 PDT 2013, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:07:41AM +0200, Joakim wrote: The vast majority of non-english alphabets in UCS can be encoded in a single byte. It is

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

ch possible encodings, even in the incomplete form I've sketched out, without having implemented them, if they know what they're doing. On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 22:01:13 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 5/25/2013 2:51 PM, Walter Bright wrote: On 5/25/2013 12:51 PM, Joakim wrote: For

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 12:55:11 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 5/26/2013 4:31 AM, Joakim wrote: My single-byte encoding has none of these problems, in fact, it's much faster and uses less memory for the same function, while providing additional speedups, from the header, that ar

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 14:37:27 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: IHBT. You said that to handle multilanguage strings, your Pretty funny how you claim you've been trolled and then go on to make a bunch of trolling arguments, which seem to imply you have no idea how a single-byte encoding works. I'm no

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 16:54:53 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: 1. Make extraordinary claims What is extraordinary about "UTF-8 is shit?" It is obviously so. 2. Refuse to back up said claims with small examples because "I don't write toy code" I never refused small examples. I have provide

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 18:29:38 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/26/13 1:45 PM, Joakim wrote: What is extraordinary about "UTF-8 is shit?" It is obviously so. Congratulations, you are literally the only person on the Internet who said so: http://goo.gl/TFhUO Haha, that is

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 19:11:42 UTC, Mr. Anonymous wrote: On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 19:05:32 UTC, Joakim wrote: On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 18:29:38 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/26/13 1:45 PM, Joakim wrote: What is extraordinary about "UTF-8 is shit?" It is obv

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 19:20:15 UTC, Marcin Mstowski wrote: Character Data Representation Architectureby IBM. It is what you want to do with additions and it is available since 1995. When you come up with an inventive idea, i suggest you to

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 19:38:21 UTC, Mr. Anonymous wrote: On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 19:25:37 UTC, Joakim wrote: I'm not sure if you were trying to make my point, but you just did. There are only 19 results for that search string. If UTF-8 were such a rousing success and most devel

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 21:08:40 UTC, Marcin Mstowski wrote: On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Joakim wrote: Also, one of the first pages talks about representations of floating point and integer numbers, which are outside the purview of the text encodings we're talking about. The

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 12:25:06 UTC, John Colvin wrote: On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 06:11:20 UTC, Joakim wrote: You claimed that my encoding was reinventing the wheel, therefore the onus is on you to show which of the multiple encodings CDRA uses that I'm reinventing. I'm not inte

Re: Why UTF-8/16 character encodings?

On Wednesday, 29 May 2013 at 23:40:51 UTC, Marco Leise wrote: Am Sun, 26 May 2013 21:25:36 +0200 schrieb "Joakim" : On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 19:11:42 UTC, Mr. Anonymous wrote: > On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 19:05:32 UTC, Joakim wrote: >> On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 1

Re: DMD under 64-bit Windows 7 HOWTO

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 at 01:24:51 UTC, Manu wrote: I might just add, that if you have Visual Studio installed (which I presume many Windows dev's do), then you don't need to do ANYTHING. DMD64 just works if VS is present. I didn't do a single thing to get DMD-Win64 working. And it's working

Re: Error after installing DMD v2.063

On Monday, 3 June 2013 at 21:18:54 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Also does ".tar.gz" vs ".tar.bz2" matter? I understand that the latter (if I spelled it right) is newer and better compression, but any reason that it might *need* to be one or the other? I'd look at xz, it's increasingly becoming t

Re: TDD is BS?

On Wednesday, 19 June 2013 at 21:54:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 6/19/2013 4:01 AM, Szymon Gatner wrote: This is not strictly D related but I am very curious about D's community opinion on the points made by non other than Jim Coplien here: TDD strikes me as an ad-hoc way of constructing

Re: TDD is BS?

On Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 05:05:29 UTC, Joakim wrote: I think their argument would be that if you're only interested in "classic algorithms" or "the best way" that is known, then you may not get much out of TDD. But if you're exploring the solution space and t

Opinions on DConf talks

Now that the last talk from DConf is up, I thought it might be a good time to review them, as someone who didn't attend. From the standpoint of a D conference, the worst talk was Walter's. It was clearly aimed at a non-D audience, so there was nothing new there for a D audience: I'm guessing

Re: Opinions on DConf talks

On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 19:38:04 UTC, MattCoder wrote: But one little thing that comes in mind now is: It really needs this type of conference when we live in Internet era? It was a U$ 30k event for how many attendees? 100 for a universe of 10k D users? What I mean is, can't "we" make th

Re: Opinions on DConf talks

On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 03:22:16 UTC, Manu wrote: I guess, in summary, sorry you were underwhelmed/disappointed. To be honest, I was too, I'd hoped I could offer more. I think a lot of other people did too... but maybe next year there will be another one with an additional year's practic

Re: D vs C++ - Where are the benchmarks?

On Sunday, 30 June 2013 at 19:48:45 UTC, Gabi wrote: Hi D community, I am new to D and got impressed with the language so much that I was thinking on introducing D it my workplace as an alternative to C++ which is heavily used on our projects. The first question that came up was how it stand

Re: D vs C++ - Where are the benchmarks?

On Sunday, 30 June 2013 at 20:05:16 UTC, Joakim wrote: On Sunday, 30 June 2013 at 19:48:45 UTC, Gabi wrote: Are there any good comparisons out there ? Not that I know of, but then I'm not looking to justify the use of D anymore. ;) When I just googled for "d programming language

Re: D vs C++ - Where are the benchmarks?

On Monday, 1 July 2013 at 04:27:46 UTC, Marco Leise wrote: Am Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:53:05 -0700 schrieb Jonathan M Davis : On Monday, July 01, 2013 04:37:43 Mehrdad wrote: > On Sunday, 30 June 2013 at 20:49:28 UTC, Peter Alexander > wrote: > > sometimes faster > > Would love an example that de

Re: Poll: how long have you been into D

On Sunday, 7 July 2013 at 17:37:37 UTC, 1100110 wrote: On 07/06/2013 02:20 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Anyway, typing on a mobile device was more or less a solved problem until that sack of shit Steve Jobs moronically convinced everyone that physical buttons and styluses were bad things (Remembe

Re: [OT] Why mobile web apps are slow

On Tuesday, 9 July 2013 at 19:27:22 UTC, QAston wrote: On Tuesday, 9 July 2013 at 18:12:24 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: A bit off-topic, but well worth reading, http://sealedabstract.com/rants/why-mobile-web-apps-are-slow/ -- Paulo I think that the garbage collection part of the atricle is very

Re: xdc: A hypothetical D cross-compiler and AST manipulation tool.

On Friday, 19 July 2013 at 13:38:12 UTC, Chad Joan wrote: Imagine targeting one of the ubiquitous ARM targets like Android, and its gazillion variants. LLVM has an ARM target I'm pretty sure, but the Android community uses GCC as their compiler. This puts LLVM/LDC on Android into a "may or ma

Re: Have Win DMD use gmake instead of a separate DMMake makefile?

On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 08:30:26 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/12/2013 11:48 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2013-08-13 02:42, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Is is possible from a licensing standpoint to just distribute a copy of gmake built by gnuwin? I don't see why we couldn't do that. I

Re: Have Win DMD use gmake instead of a separate DMMake makefile?

On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 10:09:11 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote: On 13 August 2013 10:55, Joakim wrote: would only apply to the gmake binary. The GPL is a very badly written license, but I think it has been generally established that you can distribute tools like gmake or g++ with your own

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 13:23:07 UTC, Paul Z. Barsan wrote: Think of this topic as writing letters to Santa, so: what say you ? I'll take this opportunity to put forward a GUI idea I plan on implementing in D at some point. The concept is to build a client-server GUI runtime that is as

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 20:13:05 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 20:00:31 UTC, Joakim wrote: The concept is to build a client-server GUI runtime that is as simple as possible on the client side. Are you familiar with X11? It is the 80's version of that co

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 21:05:21 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote: 1. Could it not work for offine GUIs, assuming the server and client were on the same machine, in which case one would hope the latency is low. For example X11 works locally without a network connection. Yes, you could put the

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 22:07:48 UTC, barryharris wrote: Have you seen this? http://wayland.freedesktop.org/ I've heard of it, but I didn't look at it much before. It's always described as a leaner version of X11, just as I'm suggesting a much leaner runtime than the web, but I never sa

Re: Designing a consistent language is *very* hard

On Saturday, 28 April 2012 at 08:18:34 UTC, Guillaume Chatelet wrote: Sorry for the noise but I think a few language designer out there might like this one : http://me.veekun.com/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/ I think Walter and Andrei will smile ( or cry ) reading it. It's no tro

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Wednesday, 14 August 2013 at 02:23:07 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 20:33:48 UTC, Joakim wrote: You mentioned X11 to me before, when we talked about this idea over email. Ah yes. I think X's biggest problem though is that it doesn't do *enough*. The p

Re: Designing a consistent language is *very* hard

On Thursday, 15 August 2013 at 01:59:49 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Thursday, 15 August 2013 at 01:56:09 UTC, Tyler Jameson Little wrote: On Wednesday, 14 August 2013 at 12:09:27 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote: Speaking about PHP... I believe we all read that article. I could say worse about ASP than what

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Thursday, 15 August 2013 at 01:03:24 UTC, Tyler Jameson Little wrote: On Wednesday, 14 August 2013 at 17:35:24 UTC, Joakim wrote: While remote desktop is decent, it's trying to do too much: mirroring an entire desktop is overkill. Better to use a lean client that handles most situa

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Thursday, 15 August 2013 at 16:44:21 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 06:03:35PM +0200, Wyatt wrote: On Thursday, 15 August 2013 at 14:50:43 UTC, Joakim wrote: > >Sure, but X forwarding is still laggy, as you pointed out. > I think that's only because it's a

Re: Ideas for a brand new widget toolkit

On Thursday, 15 August 2013 at 18:38:40 UTC, sclytr...@tired.com wrote: There are a lot of possibilities: you could run Qt or Gtk+ on the server and then write a backend for each of those toolkits so they can call the simple Crack server APIs and render to the Crack client. Gtk Broadway. h

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 10:31:40 UTC, Elvis Zhou wrote: On Friday, 15 November 2013 at 06:18:00 UTC, Joakim wrote: Also, does dmd have any support for cross-compilation or is it better to stick to ldc/gdc when cross compiling to Android? A month ago I tried to cross compile a Hello

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Friday, 22 November 2013 at 18:01:44 UTC, Joakim wrote: I spent some time setting up the appropriate VMs and looking at the relevant Android dev tools myself. It appears that the Android NDK uses a lightly patched version of stock llvm/clang 3.3, along with the gold linker. Their patches

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Monday, 25 November 2013 at 11:32:56 UTC, Chris wrote: On Monday, 25 November 2013 at 10:38:24 UTC, Joakim wrote: Next step, get dmd to do the same with a "hello world" native Android app. I'll update this thread as I go, for anyone who's interested. Thanks, I'm

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 at 09:53:07 UTC, Chris wrote: On Monday, 25 November 2013 at 22:32:26 UTC, Joakim wrote: Next, getting this minimal app running on Android/x86. It turns out there is some support for building executables directly in the Android NDK, just undocumented, though the

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 at 11:22:59 UTC, Joakim wrote: That is what the docs say if you want to build a native Android app, presumably that you distribute through the Play Store. But you can always build a native app for your own local dev build of Android, at least for porting purposes

Re: Ehem, ARM

On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 at 17:12:38 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote: Native apps are working, just not officially supported. I actually had a native Hello World working on ARM/Android with GDC, however fixing bugs related to native apps usually isn't high priority on Android. This bug for examp

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >