On Friday, 16 August 2013 at 10:04:22 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
[...]
The core (!) point here is that processor chips are rapidly
becoming a
collection of heterogeneous cores. Any programming language
that assumes
a single CPU or a collection of homogeneous CPUs has built-in
obsolescence.
So
As a frustrated C++ user, I was sniffing around D for a decade.
Today, I started reading "The D Programming Language". The first
line of the first code example in this book:
import std.stdio
triggered my redundancy detector. Does it have to be std.stdio?
How about std.io?
On Sunday, 18 August 2013 at 02:42:32 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
On Sunday, 18 August 2013 at 02:26:59 UTC, Paul Jurczak wrote:
As a frustrated C++ user, I was sniffing around D for a
decade. Today, I started reading "The D Programming Language".
The first line of the first code examp
My mouse is red hot from clicking around Interwebs trying to find
how to fix or report documentation issue. If this is not the best
place, please direct me to the right one.
Current (downloaded today) version of D Programming Language
Specification doesn't have 256-bit SIMD types in Vector
Ex
On Monday, 19 August 2013 at 07:36:42 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
[..]
Documentation source is hosted here:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org
Thanks, I was close, but somehow missed these files. Now I just
have to learn the syntax of .dd files.
[..]
Oh... you mean someone wrot
On Monday, 19 August 2013 at 07:36:42 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
[..]
Documentation source is hosted here:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org
I submitted my first pull request on Github. Is this the way to
go about documentation issues, which are pretty straightforward
(no lengt
On Friday, 23 August 2013 at 16:50:27 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[..]
Frankly, the fact that line counts are used at all has already
decremented the author's credibility for me.
I agree that LOC is a very poor measure, but I think the intent
was to offer some sort of comparison of syntactic comple
I wrote a few versions of a palindrome testing function and
noticed that versions using ranges (isPalindrome1..isPalindrome3)
are 3 times slower than array indexing one (isPalindrome0). Is
there a more efficient way of using ranges? Timing was done on
Windows with DMD 2.063.2 (32-bit) dmd -O -n
On Saturday, 24 August 2013 at 04:59:41 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[..]
A far more reliable measure of code complexity is to look at the
compressed size of the source code (e.g., with zip), which is an
approximation of the Kolgomorov complexity of the text, roughly
equivalent to the amount of informa
On Sunday, 25 August 2013 at 14:54:04 UTC, bearophile wrote:
I have modified and improved and fixed your code a little:
[..]
Thank you for your analysis. I've run it on Linux with DMD64
2.063.2: dmd -O -noboundscheck -inline -release and relative
timings are different than on Windows:
50
On Sunday, 25 August 2013 at 18:07:33 UTC, Paul Jurczak wrote:
[..]
I'm also running it with LDC, but it reports timings too good
to be true - something meaningful is getting optimized away and
I'm trying to find out why.
[..]
It seems that LDC optimizer is smarter than I expected
D is ranked 12th on Google software technologies trends:
http://www.google.com/trends/topcharts#vm=chart&cid=programming_languages&geo=US&date=201307&a
See also redit entry:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1l1uyk/googles_ranking_of_software_technologies_in_the/
On Sunday, 25 August 2013 at 23:23:10 UTC, Paul Jurczak wrote:
See also redit entry:
redit -> reddit
Eddit, er.. edit option would be nice to have in these forums.
On Sunday, 25 August 2013 at 23:23:10 UTC, Paul Jurczak wrote:
D is ranked 12th on Google software technologies trends:
On closer examination it looks like Vitamin D is the source of
the high rank. How about naming the next language release D+ ?
On Sunday, 25 August 2013 at 23:51:36 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 8/25/13 4:34 PM, Paul Jurczak wrote:
On Sunday, 25 August 2013 at 23:23:10 UTC, Paul Jurczak wrote:
D is ranked 12th on Google software technologies trends:
On closer examination it looks like Vitamin D is the source of
On Sunday, 25 August 2013 at 23:16:17 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
On 26/08/13 01:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
This is one of the worst PR functional programming has ever
gotten, and one of
the worst things FP has done to the larger community. Somebody
should do hard
time for this. And
On Monday, 26 August 2013 at 03:44:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 8/25/13 6:16 PM, Paul Jurczak wrote:
On Sunday, 25 August 2013 at 23:16:17 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
On 26/08/13 01:06, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
This is one of the worst PR functional programming has ever
On Thursday, 29 August 2013 at 06:34:23 UTC, Peter Williams wrote:
On 29/08/13 16:11, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
I will say this, one thing about D that has annoyed me from the
beginning is the state of the gui libs. Hence why in last
month I've
been having a real good play around with OpengGL and
On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 22:38:44 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
On 07/09/13 21:04, Walter Bright wrote:
Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is
a critical piece
of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into
Microsoft Visual Studio.)
Andrei, myself a
On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 14:55:34 UTC, Manu wrote:
[...]
Another thought... what do you reckon about including Visual-D
as an
optional component in the windows DMD installer?
One-click install that includes an environment for windows
users would
probably kick-start a lot of users.
It can
On Thursday, 19 September 2013 at 09:48:15 UTC, Joakim wrote:
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'
On Sunday, 22 September 2013 at 00:33:32 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/21/2013 5:11 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
Tracking the column number is certainly doable, but it comes
at a cost of
memory consumption and some compile speed, since it has to be
tracked in
every token. I used to do it in the Digit
On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 16:28:49 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
[...]
The canonical example would be something like,
foreach (i; iota(10)) { ... }
which in theory shouldn't be any slower than,
foreach (i; 0 .. 10) { ... }
but in practice is, no matter what the compiler.
On Monday, 14 October 2013 at 19:24:27 UTC, Spacen Jasset wrote:
Hello,
Whilst porting some C++ code I have discovered that the
compiled output from the gdc compiler seems to be 47% quicker
than the dmd compiler.
Here is a few more data points for microbenchmarks of simple
functions (P
24 matches
Mail list logo
