Sergey Gromov wrote:
Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:05:18 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Also, lazy evaluation has the risk of getting confusing as there's a lot
of escaping. Consider:
int[] arr = [ 1, 2, 3, 4 ];
auto squares = map!(a * a)(arr);
arr[] = [ 5, 6, 7, 8 ];
Now iterating squares will
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Dunno. According to SPJ, automatically parallelizing map was a failed
experiment in Haskell. Explicit parallelizing a la pmap seems to be the
way to go.
Source? I think as processors grow in number, automatic paralellization
will become increasingly important, so
Don wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Don wrote:
Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 01:38:32 +0300, Sergey Gromov
Thu, 18 Dec 2008 00:21:58 +0300, Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 00:12:18 +0300, Sergey Gromov
Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:09:41 +0100, Don wrote:
struct Foo {
Walter Bright wrote:
I keep thinking I should put on a Compiler Construction seminar!
*cough* NWCPP *cough*
Daniel Keep Wrote:
It's rather ironic, but one thing that struck me going from Visual Basic
to Python was that VB had much nicer error handling; instead of having
error handling all over the place, it was all localised to the end of
the function. This is why I absolutely adore scope
Walter Bright Wrote:
You know, the unimplemented 128 bit integer types.
Does anyone have a use for these?
Well the only uses I can think of, I'd prefer an unlimited-size big integer
struct anyway... Since they can't be operated on in registers (at least in
x86), their value seems limited.
Bill Baxter wrote:
kthx bye.
--bb
LDC can haz.
Bill Baxter wrote:
Seriously though, here's an example taken from the wikipedia Type
Inference page
someFunction(x, y) {
return x+y;
}
addone(x) {
val result; /*inferred-type result (in proposed language)*/
result = someFunction(x,1);
return result;
}
With full type
bearophile wrote:
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/
Hey, what happened to D? It's not there anymore!
Paul D. Anderson wrote:
Sun has announced that their next language release, Java 7, which was expected in 2008
will now occur sometime in 2010. The big changes that were expected were the additions of
closures and properties. Neither of those seems likely now. The focus for the next
release
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Christopher Wright, el 6 de diciembre a las 09:06 me escribiste:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
So yes one could probably switch back to the old Phobos style.
I would guess that it is not really a common situation for a program to become
single threaded again, though...
Fawzi
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Unrelated (but the main reason I use visitors), I wish D could allow could
declaring a virtual function in the class definition but implement it
elsewhere (a la C++). So...
module1.d:
--
module module1;
class A { int foo(int x); }
module 2.d:
---
module
Gregor Richards wrote:
I ran into a situation where I needed (essentially) the visitor pattern, but
the visitor pattern sucks, so I wanted to make something like class extensions
instead (that is, methods added to a class outside of the class definition).
Of course, it's not possible to do
Gregor Richards wrote:
Robert Fraser wrote:
Gregor Richards wrote:
I ran into a situation where I needed (essentially) the visitor
pattern, but the visitor pattern sucks, so I wanted to make something
like class extensions instead (that is, methods added to a class
outside of the class
Nick Sabalausky Wrote:
That's the reason I refuse to use dynamic languages and indentation-syntax
languages whenever I have a choice. They're nothing but a giant step
backwards, constantly replacing the most basic and standard compiler
diagnostics with the world's most unnecessary runtime
Robert Jacques wrote:
2) One can still catch an error if need be.
Not if the function is nothrow, since the function never sets up an
exception handling frame (that's the point of this topic, AFAICT).
Don wrote:
Strategy (1):
Windows used to have a WM_COMPACTING message (maybe it still does) which
was sent when the system was running low on memory. In D, you could
imagine a similar sort of system callback, which is called when memory
is short -- it means, free some memory now, otherwise
John Reimer wrote:
Hello Robert,
Thanks for introducing me to coLinux! Sadly, no 64-bit support yet,
otherwise I would be installing it as I write this. That's a very
awesome project.
Yep, no problem. I don't know if 64-bit is in the pipe for colinux, but
that would certainly make it
John Reimer wrote:
Hello Bill,
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 6:01 PM, TomD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Reimer Wrote:
[...]
Thanks for the example. I've avoided makefiles in the past because,
despite
their power and flexibility, they are too complicated for what
amounts to
a fairly simple task
bearophile wrote:
To test the new scoping features of D 2.021 I have used a small stressing
program, coming from this page, originally by Knuth:
http://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Man_or_boy_test
More info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_or_boy_test
My purpose is to see the D2 compiler being
Walter Bright wrote:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.037.zip
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.021.zip
929 2326 fixed in D1... scope in D2... good times... Thanks Walter,
Sean everyone else
bearophile wrote:
From what I've seen so far if you want a very flexible language there are two
solutions:
1) you can attach types to values, and manage types at runtime, ending with
dynamic languages like Ruby, Python, Scheme, CLips, tcl, and so on.
2) Otherwise you probably need a very
bearophile wrote:
Robert Fraser:
For an example, take a look at ShedSkin
I have given a hand developing ShedSkin with Mark, and I am helping its
development now too :-)
Awesome! That's one of the coolest OSS projects out there!
I agree it may not be able to scale to medium or large
Christopher Wright wrote:
On a more serious note, the standard library and available IDEs often
have more to do with ease of use of a language than the language itself
(assuming the language is reasonable).
I disagree. I still find D _much_ easier than C++ even though C++ has
tons of
Peter Modzelewski wrote:
I believe DDL is a project I don't need to introduce. Tom gave a great
talk about it and his branch of the project showing the power of DDL and
D. Video can be found here:
http://petermodzelewski.blogspot.com/2008/11/tango-conference-2008-ddl-talk.html
slides:
bearophile wrote:
Regarding the contract programming, there's this video (found with Lambda the
Ultimate) of Contract Programming recently added to the dotnet (note there are
WMA and MP4 versions of this video too, but they are hidden in this page, just
before comments, under 'downloads'):
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Yigal Chripun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Benji Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Benji Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
201 - 227 of 227 matches
Mail list logo
