On Tuesday, 7 December 2021 at 12:43:40 UTC, Rumbu wrote:
Bug or feature?
Feature. It even has a name: "overload set". It keeps you from
accidentally calling a function you had no idea existed, for
example because of a name clash.
Is there any workaround?
Yes, the error message is very
On Saturday, 1 May 2021 at 06:17:36 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Saturday, 1 May 2021 at 04:55:10 UTC, frame wrote:
I always thought as long as an object implements an interface,
it should be able to cast it from a void* if it really points
to a supporting object.
No. An interface is like a
On Thursday, 8 April 2021 at 18:06:25 UTC, Meta wrote:
On Thursday, 8 April 2021 at 18:01:56 UTC, Meta wrote:
On Thursday, 8 April 2021 at 12:19:29 UTC, WebFreak001 wrote:
```d
string to01String(int[] x) @safe
{
auto conv = x.to!(ubyte[]); // allocates new array, so
later cast to string
On Tuesday, 23 March 2021 at 23:27:54 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 March 2021 at 22:22:12 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
For a class object obj, one can use assert(obj) to get its
invariants checked. How to do this for structs?
https://dlang.org/spec/expression.html#assert_expressions
If
For a class object obj, one can use assert(obj) to get its
invariants checked. How to do this for structs?
When I enter `dmd --version`, it says:
DMD64 D Compiler v2.095.1-dirty
What should the "dirty" mean? To me, it seems looks something
went wrong somewhere.
On Monday, 1 February 2021 at 11:39:26 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
On Monday, 1 February 2021 at 11:37:49 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
Ok, so then my follow-up question becomes, does the right hand
sides of these two assignment share the same AST node? If not,
why?
Because such a shared AST node
On Monday, 1 February 2021 at 20:00:26 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
On Monday, 1 February 2021 at 09:40:20 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
An enum only exists at compile-time, and does not occupy any
space. Each time it's referenced, a new instance of the value
is created. Why is that?
Short answer: An
On Monday, 1 February 2021 at 09:40:20 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
An enum only exists at compile-time, and does not occupy any
space. Each time it's referenced, a new instance of the value
is created. Why is that?
Short answer: An enum is a literal you can refer to by name.
That's my mind-model
On Monday, 25 January 2021 at 18:45:11 UTC, Rempas wrote:
Actually what the title says. For example I have dchar c =
'\u03B3'; and I want to make it into string. I don't want to
use "to!string(c);". Any help?
char[] dcharToChars(char[] buffer, dchar value)
{
import std.range : put;
On Tuesday, 26 January 2021 at 00:47:09 UTC, Tim wrote:
Hi all,
How can I change the following to a more D-like approach by
using UFCS?
double[3] result;
Unless you have a good reason, use a slice and not a static array:
double[] result;
The result of std.array.array will be a slice
On Tuesday, 26 January 2021 at 00:47:09 UTC, Tim wrote:
Hi all,
How can I change the following to a more D-like approach by
using UFCS?
double[3] result;
Json json = res.readJson;
for(int i = 0; i < json.length; i++){
result[i] = json[i].to!double;
}
I'd prefer to do something like:
On Monday, 25 January 2021 at 21:53:15 UTC, Jack wrote:
That naming is confusing
op: it is an operator method
Op: it takes an operator as a parameter
Assign: kinda obvious.
As an example, there are opIndex, opIndexAssign and
opIndexOpAssign.
opIndex overloads obj[i].
opIndexAssign overloads
On Tuesday, 12 January 2021 at 18:44:53 UTC, Jonathan Levi wrote:
On Tuesday, 12 January 2021 at 17:46:14 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
It's obvious why arrays work, it's the primary use case. I
have no idea why classes are allowed. That classes are
allowed, but structs are not, makes no sense to me.
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 16:53:50 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
I usually use "const string text" because D has no implicit
declaration of variables. So using "ref" will not create a
variable. This is contrary to C++ where passing as "const
std::string " has a performance benefit and also C++
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 14:12:57 UTC, zack wrote:
A beginner question: How to pass strings properly to functions
in D?
Is there any allocation going on if just use a function as
"myPrint"? In C++ I have often seen calls where one just passes
a reference/const reference to a string to
On Tuesday, 12 January 2021 at 17:26:15 UTC, Jonathan Levi wrote:
Why is this not working?
```
struct S {
int x;
string y;
}
void fun(S s ...) {
This is intended for arrays and classes, not structs. Using ...
for something other than arrays and c
fun(S(5,"hi"));
That one
On Saturday, 9 January 2021 at 21:57:43 UTC, sighoya wrote:
On Saturday, 9 January 2021 at 20:20:38 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
That's not what I mean. You copy the reference. That's not
what referencing meant.
Derived d = new Derived();
Base* bp = // fails
const(Base) cbp = // compiles.
On Saturday, 9 January 2021 at 20:00:35 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2021-01-09 19:16, Q. Schroll wrote:
Say I have a class hierarchy like this:
class Base { }
class Derived : Base { }
A Derived object cannot be referenced as a Base object, but as
a const(Base) object. That makes sense
Say I have a class hierarchy like this:
class Base { }
class Derived : Base { }
A Derived object cannot be referenced as a Base object, but as a
const(Base) object. That makes sense to me.
One can replace Base by a @system delegate type (SysDG) and
Derived by a @safe delegate type
On Saturday, 12 December 2020 at 01:02:56 UTC, SealabJaster wrote:
Please see this shortened snippet: https://godbolt.org/z/j8f3x5
I've ran into annoyances before when using aliases to member
fields, but something subtle like this was rather annoying to
figure out.
Why does the compiler
On Thursday, 17 December 2020 at 16:11:37 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
It's common using arrays for buffering
Outside of CTFE, use an Appender.¹ Unless you're having a
const/immutable element type, Appender can shrink and reuse
space.² If you have, reallocation is necessary anyway not to
break
On Tuesday, 15 December 2020 at 20:38:04 UTC, Dave P. wrote:
The use case would be to define extension methods on a struct
outside of where the struct is defined. The extension method
mutates the state of the struct, so I want to ensure I am
modifying the original struct and not a copy. If
On Monday, 14 December 2020 at 14:39:14 UTC, ddcovery wrote:
On Monday, 14 December 2020 at 12:22:26 UTC, ddcovery wrote:
int opCmp(Number other){
return _value - other.value;
};
Correction:
bool opEquals(Number other){
return _value == other.value;
};
You could just give
On Sunday, 13 December 2020 at 19:02:34 UTC, Dave P. wrote:
On Sunday, 13 December 2020 at 18:44:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 December 2020 at 18:31:54 UTC, Dave P. wrote:
Do I have to write both and have one forward to the other for
more
complicated functions?
For free
On Friday, 11 December 2020 at 11:32:09 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
string is not a built in type. It is an alias defined by
druntime.
https://github.com/dlang/druntime/blob/master/src/object.d#L35
int on the other hand is defined by the compiler. It
understands it.
It doesn't magically
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 12:54:25 UTC, Andrey wrote:
[...]
WTF?
If you come from a C or C++ background, it's quite reasonable to
think of enum stuff like a #define macro. You're using static
arrays, but note that array literals allocate in many use cases.
It really is like a C/C++
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 09:32:29 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
On Wednesday, 2 December 2020 at 22:37:06 UTC, WhatMeWorry
wrote:
It works now. Not sure what I did to _not_ make it work
yesterday.
That's easy. You made a post here about it and the universe got
scared.
This made my day.
On Thursday, 26 November 2020 at 05:29:16 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 November 2020 at 21:36:36 UTC, Q. Schroll
wrote:
[1] https://wiki.dlang.org/Building_under_Windows
You might try Digger. That will hide all the tedious bits.
https://code.dlang.org/packages/digger
I think
On Wednesday, 25 November 2020 at 21:57:12 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 09:49:12PM +, Paul Backus via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 November 2020 at 21:16:06 UTC, Q. Schroll
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 November 2020 at 21:11:24 UTC, Paul Backus
> wrote:
> > On
On Wednesday, 25 November 2020 at 21:16:15 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
I typically do:
make -f posix.mak std/.test
-Steve
For some reason, [1] says `make.exe` would be installed by the
DMD installer, but I found none. It explicitly says not to use
GNU make. (I'm on Windows.)
[1]
On Wednesday, 25 November 2020 at 21:11:24 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 November 2020 at 20:58:20 UTC, Q. Schroll
wrote:
My setup:
* A fresh DMD installed a few minutes ago.
* Clone of my Phobos fork with up-to-date changes from
dlang/phobos/master.
Do you have clones of dmd and
When trying to unit-test an unchanged phobos module from
phobos/master, I get errors such as
module core.lifetime import copyEmplace not found
and template instantiation errors. What is the correct arguments
to pass to (r)dmd? I know it worked for me some years ago, but
somehow, it
On Thursday, 22 October 2020 at 21:55:59 UTC, Jack Applegame
wrote:
There is a funny feature (or bug) in the D language:
static alias this and static operator overloading.
For example
interface Foo {
static {
int value;
void opAssign(int v) { value = v; }
int
On Wednesday, 10 June 2020 at 00:53:30 UTC, Seb wrote:
It's a bit more complicated though as you need to avoid subtle
breakage with ranges that return tuples that are auto-expanded
like e.g. `foreach (k,v; myDict)`.
Okay, I can accept that. It's a poor decision, but well, it is
what it is.
Is there any particular reason why std.range : enumerate is a
thing and
foreach (i, e; range) { ... }
doesn't work from the get-go? I wouldn't have such an issue with
it if static foreach would work with enumerate just fine. As far
as I can tell,
foreach (e; range) { ... }
is
On Wednesday, 13 May 2020 at 13:36:14 UTC, wjoe wrote:
On Monday, 11 May 2020 at 19:08:09 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
[...]
1. You can have variables ("data members") of reference type
in structs. (They work like head-const pointers; if D had
head-const or at least head-const pointers, those
On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 09:03:40 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
string exists(string s) {
return "__traits(compiles, { mixin(\"alias _ = "~s~";\");
})";
}
Little nitpicking, but D has many forms of string literals.
Escaping is hard to read especially without syntax highlighting.
Escaping
On Tuesday, 2 June 2020 at 11:44:10 UTC, Vladimirs Nordholm wrote:
Hello.
I want to create a tree which maps sequences of numbers to
data. ex:
- [1, 2]-> 1
- [1, 3, 1] -> 2
- [1, 3, 2] -> 3
I have no prior knowledge of what makes a good tree, and I am
unsure if what I've got is good. I
On Saturday, 9 May 2020 at 13:44:27 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 May 2020 at 17:46:28 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
C++'s decision to make references part of the type has some
advantages, but D didn't do it because of many disadvantages.
Can you outline or give a link describing the
On Wednesday, 6 May 2020 at 09:07:22 UTC, wjoe wrote:
Hello,
I'm choking on a piece of C++ I have no idea about how to
translate to D.
std::is_reference
In general, you can't. In D, `ref` is not part of the type, it's
a "storage class", and as such it is a property that a function
On Saturday, 9 November 2019 at 13:26:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 9 November 2019 at 12:30:46 UTC, René Heldmaier
wrote:
The part i don't understand is "is(C R == Complex!R)".
What does that mean?
That's checking the if the template argument C is a case of
Complex!R, while at
struct Example
{
private void helper(int i, this X)() { }
void funcTempl(T, this X)(T value)
{
this.helper!0();
// ^ Why do I need this?
}
}
void main()
{
auto ex = Example();
ex.funcTempl(1);
}
The question is in the comment in the code. Is that
For a function, one can have a vararg parameter at the end like
this:
int sum(int[] ar ...) { /* code */ }
But for templates, such a declaration is an error. Is there a
specific reason why?
I know I can do it and ensure all the template parameters are
values and are convertible to the desired
Probably you've come over this problem once in a while, too.
You have a repeating solution, so you use a for(each) loop.
Sometimes, there is an action to be performed between the end of
one iteration and the beginning of the next, if there is one. The
prime example is printing the comma when
Basically the headline. I want to try to implement my DIP. I've
already forked DMD from GitHub. Now, what would I have to do in
order to get a D compiler with my changes?
I have Windows on x86-64 and Visual Studio on my machine.
On Thursday, 30 May 2019 at 20:20:47 UTC, Tomas wrote:
I'm very new to D, coming from C++ I'm missing parameter pack
expansion and fold expressions.
I also miss the expansion operator and fold expressions.
In D, there is no such thing, and simulating it in a general way
has so much friction,
I have the rather strange question: Why does this work?
struct S
{
int value0;
alias opApply = opApplyImpl!(int delegate(ref int)); //1
int opApplyImpl(DG : int delegate(ref int))(scope DG
callback) //2
{
if (auto result = callback(value0))
On Tuesday, 2 April 2019 at 18:52:07 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2019-04-02 20:44, Q. Schroll wrote:
After removing the calls to writeln, the error I get is:
`this` for `read` needs to be type `Outer` not type `Inner`
You cannot access stuff in Outer because Inner objects are not
outer
On Tuesday, 2 April 2019 at 18:20:09 UTC, Andrey wrote:
Hello,
In this example how can I access the members "read" and "q" of
struct Outer from Inner struct?
struct Outer
{
ulong q = 1;
Inner inner;
void read(ulong value)
{
q += value;
}
void run()
{
For any type constructors like const, I can use ConstOf!T to get
`T` with const attached. For a delegate/function type DG, e.g.
int delegate(int), how can I get the @safe version of that type,
i.e. int delegate(int) @safe?
I tried
alias SafeOf(DG) = DG @safe;
but it didn't compile.
The
On Wednesday, 27 February 2019 at 03:53:35 UTC, Victor Porton
wrote:
After following your suggestion to rewrite it with Stride it
does not work either. I assume the error is somehow related to
allSatisfy!.
I have a template function `fImpl` I whish to instantiate
manually using the new name `f`. Reason is simple: `f` should not
be a template, but overloading it makes it easier that way.
Nothing's more simple in D:
int fImpl(T)(T value) { return cast(int) value; }
alias f = fImpl!int;
On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 22:56:37 UTC, Victor Porton wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 22:51:15 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
Grouping arguments could be done, but from my experience, it
does not buy you anything; rather it makes it worse. Better
just deal with heterogeneous stuff just
On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 21:43:31 UTC, Victor Porton wrote:
Compilation of unittest at the bottom of this file fails with
an error. What is my error?
I cannot tell you, why exactly you get these error messages. I
can explain you the probable cause of the errors. I have not
tested
On Friday, 25 January 2019 at 20:31:29 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 08:12:33PM +, Q. Schroll via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Say I have a class C and I want a pointer to a C handle.
Note that taking the address of `C` will actually give you a
pointer to the reference
Say I have a class C and I want a pointer to a C handle.
I tried the following pieces of syntax:
C* obj = new C(); // gives me a C
C* obj = new C*(); // gives me a C**
C* obj = C*(); // refuses to compile
Is it even possible? This sounds so newbie...
I know it's fairly simple with
On Saturday, 19 January 2019 at 20:38:00 UTC, faissaloo wrote:
On Saturday, 19 January 2019 at 20:07:34 UTC, Rubn wrote:
On Saturday, 19 January 2019 at 17:49:31 UTC, faissaloo wrote:
[...]
If you look at the implementation, "lines" is a struct.
On Thursday, 13 December 2018 at 23:33:39 UTC, Stanislav Blinov
wrote:
On Thursday, 13 December 2018 at 13:17:05 UTC, aliak wrote:
Ah. Is there any case where you would not want to do that when
you have a T value as parameter?
Hypothetically, yes, e.g. an object that contains references to
On Wednesday, 30 May 2018 at 21:02:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Wednesday, May 30, 2018 20:42:38 Q. Schroll via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
It seems one cannot std.algorithm.mutation.move objects
explicitly. Say I have a non-copyable type
[...]
It fails because move() cannot be executed
It seems one cannot std.algorithm.mutation.move objects
explicitly. Say I have a non-copyable type
struct NoCopy
{
int payload; // some payload
pure nothrow @nogc @safe @disable:
this(this); // make it non copyable
}
that is being used in a compile-time function
On Sunday, 27 May 2018 at 16:00:15 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
Honestly, I'd suggest that folks never use in at this point.
There's zero benefit to it.
[...]
Exactly. If you intend const, just write const. If you intend
const scope, write const scope.
On Wednesday, 9 May 2018 at 09:38:14 UTC, BoQsc wrote:
The D Style suggest to camelCase constants, while Java naming
conventions always promoted uppercase letter.
Is there an explanation why D Style chose to use camelCase
instead of all UPPERCASE for constants, was there any technical
On Tuesday, 1 May 2018 at 12:03:15 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
On 05/01/2018 01:44 PM, Per Nordlöw wrote:
In which cases (if any) is it possible to make a
delegate-style implementation of toString such as
void toString(scope void delegate(const(char)[]) sink)
const @trusted pure
{
Why is there a difference between
struct S
{
template func(T)
{
enum impl = "whatever string";
auto func(T arg) { mixin(impl); } // eponymous template
auto func(T arg) const { mixin(impl); } // eponymous template
}
}
and
struct R
{
private enum impl = "whatever
I've tried to get into the changes by DIP1000 and discovered this:
struct S { ref S id() return { return this; } }
void main() { S* p = ().id(); }
Should it really compile? (rdmd -dip1000 .\test_return_ref.d)
On Saturday, 28 October 2017 at 00:14:15 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko wrote:
For an argument, the TEX command "^" accepts either a single
character or a bracket-enclosed string of arbitrary length. So
$3^3^3$ indeed transforms to ${3^3}^3$, but not for some deeper
reason this time.
On my TeX
For a class/interface type `A` and a class `C` inheriting from
`A` one can do
A a = getA();
if (auto c = cast(C) a)
{ .. use c .. }
to get a `C` view on `a` if it happens to be a `C`-instance.
Sometimes one cannot find a good new name for `c` while there is
no advantage of accessing
On Friday, 4 August 2017 at 16:40:08 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
[..]
foreach(x;A .. B)
it's lowerd to
auto limit = B;
auto key = A;
for(auto x = key;key < limit;++key)
{
// use x
}
That's enough to know that the foreach loop does not reuse the
space for the iteration variable. That was what I
One can do
BigInt n = returnsBigInt();
foreach (i; BigInt(0) .. n)
{ .. }
How is this implemented? The code for BigInt is very large and I
didn't find it.
And is it more efficient than
for (BigInt i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{ .. }
as incrementing is a costly operation?
On Monday, 19 June 2017 at 16:54:46 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 06/19/2017 08:19 AM, Q. Schroll wrote:
Can't I tell the AA to set a value for a given key if it
doesn't already
have one
(1) with only one lookup, and
(2) in a safe way?
aa.get(key, defaultValue)
Trying to implement some random function I encountered this:
uint randFunc(uint x)
{
static uint[uint] vals;
if (auto r = x in vals) return *r;
return vals[x] = uniform!uint();
}
I have to lookup x twice and it seems that there is no way around
it. Can't I
On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 at 02:33:36 UTC, ketmar wrote:
Q. Schroll wrote:
void test(T)(T* arg);
void test(T)(ref T arg);
Let p be any pointer. Why is test(p) not an ambiguity error?
Why is the second overload chosen?
'cause `ref T` is more generic than `T*`. think of it as
"greedy
void test(T)(T* arg);
void test(T)(ref T arg);
Let p be any pointer. Why is test(p) not an ambiguity error? Why
is the second overload chosen?
Making the first one take auto ref T* lets the compiler choose
the first.
Making the second one non-ref lets the compiler give me an
ambiguity error.
On Tuesday, 7 March 2017 at 02:30:21 UTC, ketmar wrote:
Q. Schroll wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 March 2017 at 01:45:48 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
You pass your modified file to the compiler:
dmd yourfile.d format.d
The format.d there can be a copy of the one from phobos (or a
fork or whatever) and
On Tuesday, 7 March 2017 at 01:45:48 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
You pass your modified file to the compiler:
dmd yourfile.d format.d
The format.d there can be a copy of the one from phobos (or a
fork or whatever) and since you passed it explicitly on the
command line, it takes precedence over
I have a fork of the standard-library in the folder "phobos". In
version 2.072.1 of the compiler, I could use code like
void main()
{
import phobos.std.format;
/* code for checking my changes to format */
}
compiled with
$ dmd -I"phobos" test_format.d
in the
Why don't lambdas cast to a delegate if they are of type R
function(Args)? I don't see any reason to that; a lambda should
be a delegate type by default, and a function only as a special
guarantee/optimization. It just makes them cumbersome to use with
toDelegate.
Probably there is a good
When using functions with delegate (or function ptr) parameters
which should comply with some attributes, I cannot call the
delegate in the function what makes it pretty useless (I haven't
done research, but I claim that generally most functions taking
delegate parameters call them).
void
Why does it do that?
And seemingly it does not require it for opApply with more than
two arguments.
On Saturday, 10 September 2016 at 09:38:15 UTC, Lodovico Giaretta
wrote:
On Saturday, 10 September 2016 at 08:23:35 UTC, Q. Schroll
wrote:
Is there a difference between inferred and annotated
attributes?
Example:
struct X(T)
{
this(S)(in S[] arr) // inferred pure
{ }
Is there a difference between inferred and annotated attributes?
Example:
struct X(T)
{
this(S)(in S[] arr) // inferred pure
{ }
}
void main() pure
{
X!uint mut = [ 1, 2 ]; // proves inference (cf. main is
pure)
// immutable X!uint imm1 = [
On Friday, 2 September 2016 at 17:33:22 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 9/2/16 1:18 PM, Q. Schroll wrote:
When overloading assignment, I've been taught in my C++ course
to return
a reference to the lvalue being assigned to. This is easily
possible in
D, but in Phobos it is used rarely and
When overloading assignment, I've been taught in my C++ course to
return a reference to the lvalue being assigned to. This is
easily possible in D, but in Phobos it is used rarely and in Ali
Çehreli's Book it is neither taught to do so.
Is there any reason to it? To me it seems very obvious
On Friday, 29 July 2016 at 19:24:59 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 7/29/16 3:00 PM, Q. Schroll wrote:
Cases to consider: Arrays and AAs with const(T) Elements,
where T is a
value or a reference type respectively.
[snip]
Questions:
(1) Why do I have to specify the type here? Why does
Cases to consider: Arrays and AAs with const(T) Elements, where T
is a value or a reference type respectively.
class C { }
struct S { }
const(S)[] varr;
const(C)[] carr;
const(S)[S] vaav;
const(C)[S] caav;
const(S)[C] vaac;
const(C)[C] caac;
pragma(msg,
On Thursday, 30 June 2016 at 17:08:45 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote:
Is there a way to have an associative array of const values? I
thought it would have been:
const(T)[K] map;
map[x] = y;
but the second line gives Error: cannot modify const
expression. I would think that the const(T)[K] would
Lets say I want to print a table with floats. How can it be
formatted like that:
| 2.4 |
| 12.2 |
| 8.131 |
| 17.44 |
Also acceptable is
| 2.400 |
| 12.200 |
| 8.131 |
| 17.440 |
but not
| 02.4 |
| 12.2 |
| 08.131 |
| 17.44 |
or any other solutions with leading zeros.
On Thursday, 31 March 2016 at 13:51:00 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
I think it's a bug. foreach and opApply are specially coded in
the compiler I think, so there's bound to be inconsistencies
between them and normal overload rules.
-Steve
I have never filed a bug report. Should this be
On Thursday, 31 March 2016 at 13:39:25 UTC, ixid wrote:
What is going on with UFCS and foreach?
foreach(i;0..5).writeln;
This is not UFCS; it is calling writeln on module scope. See
http://dlang.org/spec/module.html#module_scope_operators
Your code is semantically identical with
foreach
Simple as that, shouldn't this work?
struct X
{
int opApply(int delegate(string) dg)
{
return dg("impure");
}
int opApply(int delegate(string) pure dg) pure
{
return dg("pure");
}
}
void main()
{
X x;
string result;
x.opApply(
import std.stdio;
void main()
{
short ss = -1;
ushort us = 0;
intsi = -1;
uint ui = 0;
if (ss < us)
writeln("a");
else
writeln("b");
if (si < ui)
writeln("A");
else
writeln("B");
}
prints "aB" due to integral promotion
92 matches
Mail list logo
