On Sunday, 18 March 2018 at 18:45:23 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
If we could go back in time and talk with a young Walter about
the consequences of choosing the scheme the way it is, maybe he
might have made different choices, but at this point, it's hard
to change it.
I think this
On Sunday, 18 March 2018 at 11:12:46 UTC, Alex wrote:
´´´
Are there any scenarios in which the person writing the class,
would want to encapsulate their class, or some parts of it,
from the rest of a module (while being forced to put the class
in this module)?
´´´
The answer is no. As the
On Sunday, 18 March 2018 at 10:14:30 UTC, Alain Soap wrote:
BTW i think adding this can be useful. The FreePascal language
has `strict private` for example.
" Private - All fields and methods that are in a private block,
can only be accessed in the module (i.e. unit) that contains the
class
On Sunday, 18 March 2018 at 06:28:11 UTC, Amorphorious wrote:
And who the fuck are you? See, it's funny how you say I'm a
noob with mental problems that says shit about people yet you
are doing THE EXACT SAME THING! At the very least, you are no
better than me, in fact worse, because you
On Sunday, 18 March 2018 at 05:01:39 UTC, Amorphorious wrote:
The fact is, the creator of the class is also the creator of
the module.. and preventing him from having full access to the
class is ignorant. He doesn't need to encapsulate himself.
Encapsulation is ONLY meant to reduce
On Sunday, 18 March 2018 at 05:01:39 UTC, Amorphorious wrote:
Why do you insist that you know how everything works and you
are the harbinger of truth. The fact is, you don't know squat
about what you are talking about and you just want to conform D
to your naive ignorant
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 21:33:01 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 21:22:44 UTC, arturg wrote:
maybe extend that to a list of types?
this is basically what C++ friend does and D was trying to
avoid the complexity of
Really, the complexity of 'friend' comes from
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 14:16:19 UTC, bauss wrote:
I don't like the name @deny .
how about:
@reallyis private string firstName_;
mmm..perhaps not... then how about...
@strictly private string firstName_;
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 09:18:13 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote:
It's a language design decision as to whether a particular
feature is worth supporting. I would like this feature too
though. I'm not sure how much compiler complexity would be
added by having another visibility modifier.
D
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 07:16:22 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Unfortunately, we do periodically have folks act like that
around here, but fortunately, for the most part, it's folks who
don't stick around long, and our regular posters are generally
well-behaved.
- Jonathan M Davis
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 07:01:53 UTC, rumbu wrote:
3 days ago:
https://forum.dlang.org/post/ylngefsfuwqodaprw...@forum.dlang.org
yeah...but that presumes Amorphorious is an 'expert programmer'.
which is not the impression I got ;-)
On Friday, 16 March 2018 at 11:44:59 UTC, Chris wrote:
Hint: there's a Ph.D. in it ;)
Hint: Do not write a Ph.D based on impressions ;-)
On Friday, 16 March 2018 at 07:58:33 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
Playing captain the obvious but this is COPY not slice.
Shh. Don't tell my customers that.
D had slices since 2000s, pointing to any kind of memory.
Mmm..D showing off.. as always ;-)
On Thursday, 15 March 2018 at 18:39:08 UTC, rumbu wrote:
My quote is out of context. Somebody asked surprised why C#
developers are interested in D. For me (mainly a C# developer),
this is the main reason: native compilation (and this includes
memory management). I highlighted the fact that
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 21:38:59 UTC, Amorphorious wrote:
You are a moron...etc..etc..etc..etc.
See. This is what happens when you have access to a keyboard
while high on ice.
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 12:39:24 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
Hi, folks!
I’m testing waters for a D course at one University for first
time it’ll be an optional thing. It’s still discussed but may
very well become a reality.
Before you ask - no, I’m not lecturing and in fact, I didn’t
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 08:44:48 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Making modules the lowest level of encapsulation does that
without the need for an extra keyword for friends while still
maintaining a strict border between external and internal APIs.
Moreover, it restricts friends to the same
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 12:10:07 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
On 14/03/2018 1:02 AM, psychoticRabbit wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 11:31:12 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
Ah yes.
You're completely correct if you subscribe to Adam's and
ketmar's file sizes expectation.
A D module
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 11:31:12 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
Ah yes.
You're completely correct if you subscribe to Adam's and
ketmar's file sizes expectation.
A D module and package is one level of abstraction. If that
level of abstraction starts to fill up and gets large, you
split
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 08:44:48 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Moreover, it restricts friends to the same module, easing the
maintenance burden and decreasing the chance of error. It was a
great decision.
But, a module can contain so many 'friends'.
Q. How many 'friends' does it take, before
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 08:29:42 UTC, Alex wrote:
package myPackage;
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args)
{
System.out.println("Hello World!");
myClass c = new myClass();
c.myPrivateClassMember= "wtf";
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 09:52:06 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 09:14:26 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
That's make a little uncomfortable, given how long and complex
modules can easily become(and aleady are)
Is there a practical difference between a) a module that
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 08:44:48 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Any new keywords, or reuse of existing keywords, does make the
language more complex. Everything that is added must have a
reason. Private is module level because friend is so common in
C++, i.e. people find it useful and it would
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 08:05:43 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:03:11 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I think it's a great feature and I use it frequently. It's
allows more flexibility in class design. Without it, we'd need
another protection attribute to enable the
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:03:11 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I think it's a great feature and I use it frequently. It's
allows more flexibility in class design. Without it, we'd need
another protection attribute to enable the concept of "private
to the module".
what about a new access
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 07:05:48 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
Your thought model is much younger than modules. Modules have
existed since the mid 70's.
They work, other designs over the years have proven to have
faults and problems.
D's design is evolved from already existing ideas to
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:43:55 UTC, ketmar wrote:
that is, we should stick to defective design only 'cause there
is no "other D" that made it right? ;-)
also, your question is not valid. you were told several times
that you're evaluating the whole thing wrong, but you're
insisting
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:03:11 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
The same applies here. Encapsulation simply isn't broken by
this feature.
What you're saying, is in D, class encapsulation is really
'module' encapsulation.
I get it. Fine. It's an intersting design decision.
But, in doing
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:26:13 UTC, Radu wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:14:49 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:01:43 UTC, ketmar wrote:
ah, yes, sorry: i completely forgot that C++ was invented
after c# and java. mea maxima culpa!
My point was,
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:25:39 UTC, ketmar wrote:
psychoticRabbit wrote:
So the 3 most used languages got it wrong??
yes.
do you know any other language, where a private class memeber, is
not private to the class?
(btw. that's a question, not a statement).
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:03:11 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
I think it's a great feature and I use it frequently. It's
allows more flexibility in class design. Without it, we'd need
another protection attribute to enable the concept of "private
to the module".
That's kind of my point.
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 05:35:30 UTC, Amorphorious wrote:
There is another problem:
3rd: You are a brainwashed monkey who can't think for himself.
Gee..takes some real brains to come up with that one.
See, You learned a little about C++/C#/Java and think the world
must conform to
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 06:01:43 UTC, ketmar wrote:
ah, yes, sorry: i completely forgot that C++ was invented after
c# and java. mea maxima culpa!
My point was, that the 2 most widely used and popular languages
on the plant, C# and Java, decided NOT to make private, something
mean
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 05:52:55 UTC, ketmar wrote:
psychoticRabbit wrote:
There are two problems I see:
1) it is not how C++ done it.
2) it is not how C++ done it.
and you're completely right: it is not how C++ done it.
umm...didn't you forget something:
1) it is not how C# done it.
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 02:24:38 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 02:06:57 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
Mmm.. I don't think I like it.
I feel you should be able to make a member of a class,
private, regardless of where the class is located. This seems
to break the
On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 at 01:39:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
private is private to the module, not the class. There is no
way in D to restrict the rest of the module from accessing the
members of a class. This simplification makes it so that stuff
like C++'s friend are unnecessary. If
On Monday, 12 March 2018 at 19:09:42 UTC, Dennis wrote:
On Monday, 12 March 2018 at 16:07:40 UTC, SealabJaster wrote:
This post may not be all that helpful, but I feel the need to
voice the frustrations with my experience. Sorry for the
pointless/off-topic rant.
Thank you for this post, I
I cannot get my head around, why private is not private, in D.
How do I make a private member, private?
-
module test;
import std.stdio;
void main()
{
myClass c = new myClass();
c.myPrivateClassMember= "wtf";
writeln(c.myPrivateClassMember);
}
class myClass
{
private
On Monday, 12 March 2018 at 06:13:35 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I'm comparing two open source projects, both hosted on github.
Both available in the same supermarket. It seems that one of
them is easy to reach to, the other one is on the top shelf and
you need a forklift to reach it. And when you
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 16:15:22 UTC, rumbu wrote:
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 14:37:28 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
And this clarifies the source of your confusion. The D
programming language is an open source project, not a
for-profit company. D is not the language you're looking for.
There
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 13:36:27 UTC, R wrote:
I am sure that lots of D members will be quick to point out,
that C# is run by a commercial company and D has only open
source contributors. Now why did you not contribute! /sarcasm
I'd like to point out, that C# is run by a commercial
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 07:59:53 UTC, rumbu wrote:
My opinion is that the day when C# will compile to native (on
any platform), the C# developer interest in D will drop
instantly.
OT:
Interestingly, my uni is still stuck in the OOP paradigm, and is
now teaching intro to OOP using .NET
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 05:41:02 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
I regret some of things I said. I'm sorry for any offence
caused, specifically towards members of the DLF.
I don't think you need to regret saying anything. You've
demonstrated a willingness to engage in a conversation that we
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 03:52:19 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
Whether dub does that currently I do not know, as i don't use
dub, or any additional packages outside of phobos.
oh > dub list ;-)
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:04:27 UTC, Roberto wrote:
How do I list installed modules?
or..
https://dlang.org/phobos/index.html
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:04:27 UTC, Roberto wrote:
How do I list installed modules?
dmd --list-modules
datefmt
dateparser
std.algorithm
std.array
std.conv
std.datetime
std.digest
std.exception
std.file
std.format
std.getopt
std.json
std.math
...
Presumably, you mean packages installed
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:58:50 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
i.e. How can the D Foundation encourage new additional resoures
to focus on things that also matter to the community.
and btw. the mention about strengthing the use of DIPS, does just
that.
there are many improvement to
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:53:30 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
That sentence was to counter psychoticRabbit. I didn't mean it
literally. If you've read my earlier posts, it's not BetterC I
have an issue with, it's the allocation of time.
Well that should have been the basis of your
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:46:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Rust was more popular and who could use that?
Rust is popular because of its ideas, not because it pandered.
I don't see "programmer" portability as being pandering.
It common sense.
Rust is good, in that it seeks to do
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:36:51 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
The D Language Foundation, being the leading body of D, should
hold some responsibility to the interests of the majority.
And also the minority. A lesson that humanity has to learn over
and over again.
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:25:07 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean at that last sentence.
I mean, cause D is so compatible with C/C++/Java/C# - that you
can easily switch between them.
Whereas as Go and Rust have their own thing going, making those
languages really
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:06:08 UTC, R wrote:
And "scripting" language like PHP, that everybody
criticizes just keeps growing and gained 11% market share in
the last 7 years ( at now 83% ). Where as D its gain has been
minimalist thanks to people leaving almost as fast as it gain.
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:06:08 UTC, R wrote:
Point to the wall on the left side. That is what your talking
to. D its focus on C++ as a bad plan has been made pushed by
many people ( lots who left ). Its like asking Go for Generics.
And its very nice to see the "71% in the poll do not
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 00:36:19 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?
Oddly enough, I think this is D's strength.
Golang tried to draw the line, and look where that got it. Now
it's a limited language for a specific domain (at least
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:45:25 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I'm talking about the D Foundation priority list, not about the
open source community surrounding it. I have nothing against
betterC, the community is free to work on it, but I don't
understand why it's a *priority* for the D foundation.
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:45:25 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I'm talking about the D Foundation priority list, not about the
open source community surrounding it. I have nothing against
betterC, the community is free to work on it, but I don't
understand why it's a *priority* for the D
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents
don't care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?
who cares what 'the majority' want... I mean really.
stuff em!
(ohh... that was in jest.. don't take that
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:47:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it
can't even interface with itself through DLLs?
A reasonable point.
But.. in any case.. people work on what they are motivated to
work on.
That's really all there is
On Friday, 9 March 2018 at 21:43:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Hello, the vision document of the Founation for the first six
months of 2018 is here:
nice.
andd that 'langauge specification' is really important too.. or
people will drift towards languages that 'are' properly specified.
On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 20:50:37 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
Also, if you'll allow me to have crazy ideas for a moment, one
wonders why we shouldn't just release Phobos itself through
dub? Rust makes people use their build tool, why not us?
That's the day I stop using D.
I do not, and
On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 07:11:24 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
That example actually should be perfectly @safe, because the
array is null, and it's using writeln. Dereferencing null is
@safe, because it segfaults and thus can't corrupt memory or
access invalid memory. You obviously don't
On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 05:22:58 UTC, Void-995 wrote:
Can somebody explain how [0] is more safe than array.ptr?
Just want to understand why second statement isn't allowed in
safe anymore.
int[] a;
writeln([0]); // good - runtime produces a
core.exception.RangeError
//writeln(arr.ptr);
On Monday, 5 March 2018 at 06:01:27 UTC, J-S Caux wrote:
So the codes are trivial, simply some check of raw speed:
double x = 0.0;
for (int a = 0; a < 10; ++a) x += atan(1.0/(1.0 +
sqrt(1.0 + a)));
for C++ and
double x = 0.0;
for (int a = 0; a < 1_000_000_000; ++a) x +=
On Monday, 5 March 2018 at 23:34:50 UTC, askjfbd wrote:
Someone please tell me how, for I am a newbie and don't know
any solutions even to this very simple problem. As I learned
dlang using the Dlang tour page, I stuck at the alias & Strings
page. I have tried to compile the following simple
On Monday, 5 March 2018 at 23:40:35 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
I'd have a snowball's chance in hell convincing anyone at a
"regular" company of adopting D if anyone there even imagined
any of the above could happen.
We have to do better than this.
Atila
Fair enough. Doing better is always a
On Saturday, 3 March 2018 at 01:50:25 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Glad to announce D 2.079.0.
This release comes with experimental `@nogc` exception throwing
(-dip1008), a lazily initialized GC, better support for minimal
runtimes, and an experimental Windows toolchain based on the
lld linker
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 12:20:31 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
And if you like C so much, what are you doing in a safe systems
programming language forum?
How safe is D.. i mean really ;-)
and why do people ask me that question.. I don't get it.
I program (or try to) in as many languages as
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 13:05:58 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
Science, in and of itself, cannot be dodgy.
science must involve humans, and humans are often dodgy.
Yes there are debates to be had, cf. Popper, Kuhn, etc. but the
foundation of science is hypotheses, experimentation, and
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 12:02:43 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 11:52 +, Russel Winder wrote:
[…]
report science, does make science dodgy. But that stray off
topic for
[…]
s/does/does not/
Obviously. :-)
mmm...freudian slip??
I study science...and what's being
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 11:00:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
In any case, I expect that anyone who wants D3 is going to have
a very hard time convincing Walter and Andrei that such large
breaking changes would be worth it at this point.
- Jonathan M Davis
I agree. I don't think there is
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 10:21:05 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
...continue with C in the face of overwhelming evidence
it is the wrong thing to do.
yeah, the health fanatics who promote their crap to goverments
and insurance agencies, use very similar arguments about sugar,
salt, alchohol,
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 10:08:57 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
This is of course only partly true.
while ((*dst++ = *src++) != 0) {}
works just great, and also better shows what's actually being
tested for in the loop.
--
Simen
That's what I was after. Thanks!
trying to do this C code, in D, but getting error:
"Error: assignment cannot be used as a condition, perhaps `==`
was meant?"
any help much appreciated:
--
while ((*dst++ = *src++)) {}
--
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 03:57:25 UTC, barry.harris wrote:
Sorry little rabbit, your are misguided in this belief. Back in
day we all used C and this is the reason most "safer" languages
exist today.
You can write pretty safe code in C these days, without too much
trouble. We have the
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 02:35:46 UTC, Meta wrote:
D1 -> D2 nearly killed D (can't remember which, but it was
either Walter or Andrei that have said this on multiple
occasions). A D2 -> D3 transition might generate a lot of
publicity if done very carefully, but more than likely it would
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 02:02:42 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
btw. I never said 'stop changing', I said "I wish programming
languages would just stop changing so often."
I'd also argue, that languages that are relatively stable, are
far 'safer' than languages that constantly change.
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 01:19:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Because it has not stopped changing. To wit:
K C (1978)
C89 / C90 / ANSI C (1989-1990)
The 1995 amendment to ANSI C (1995)
C99 (1999)
(Embedded C (2008))
C11 (2011)
T
btw. I never
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 00:53:02 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 12:39:08AM +, psychoticRabbit via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...]
On the otherhand, I wish programming languages would just stop
changing so often.
[...]
Change is inevitable, except from a vending
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 21:49:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
That being said, I think that it's a given that we need to make
breaking changes at least occasionally. The question is more
how big they can be and how we go about it. Some changes would
clearly be far too large to be worth
On Wednesday, 28 February 2018 at 01:06:30 UTC, dark777 wrote:
Regex validates years bisexto and not bisextos in format:
const std::regex
On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 at 15:52:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
https://isocpp.org/blog/2018/02/new-cpp-foundation-developer-survey-lite-2018-02
Andrei
really, online surveys are dodgy at best.
btw. Bjarne Stroustrup recently received the 2018 Charles Stark
Draper Prize for
On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 at 02:57:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
Saturday morning, a user complained that several leading dub
packages had poor documentation, if they could find it at all.
That's changing, right now.
Before long, packages without docs are going to suffer. This
will put
On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 at 00:04:59 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
A 64-bit double can only hold about 14-15 decimal digits of
precision. Anything past that, and there's a chance your
"different" numbers are represented by exactly the same bits
and the computer can't tell the difference.
T
On Sunday, 25 February 2018 at 14:52:19 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
1 == 1.0, no?
no. at least, not when a language forces you to think in terms of
types.
1 is an int.
1.0 is a floating point.
I admit, I've never printed output without using format
specifiers, but still, if I say
On Sunday, 25 February 2018 at 12:13:31 UTC, Andrea Fontana wrote:
On Sunday, 25 February 2018 at 09:30:12 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
I would have preffered it defaulted java style ;-)
System.out.println(1.0); // i.e. it prints 'what I told it to
print'.
System.out.println(1.0); // print
On Sunday, 25 February 2018 at 01:49:05 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
On 25/02/2018 2:31 PM, psychoticRabbit wrote:
NNTP is not the future..it's the past.
Good news, mailing lists will exist long after we're all dead
and gone.
We don't actually die, cause every atom in our body is billions
On Sunday, 25 February 2018 at 08:46:19 UTC, rumbu wrote:
On Sunday, 25 February 2018 at 08:08:30 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
But umm what happended to the principle of least
astonishment?
writeln(1.1); (prints 1.1)
whereas..
writeln(1.0); (prints 1)
I don't get it. Cause it's
On Sunday, 25 February 2018 at 06:35:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
It's not printing ints. It's printing doubles. It's just that
all of the doubles have nothing to the right of the decimal
point, so they don't get printed with a decimal point. If you
did something like start with 1.1, then
On Sunday, 25 February 2018 at 05:40:19 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
int[] intArr = iota(1, 11).array();
- Jonathan M Davis
thanks!
oh man. It's so easy to do stuff in D ;-)
But this leads me to a new problem now.
When I run my code below, I get ints printed instead of doubles??
Hi. Anyone know whether something like this is possible?
I've tried various conversions/casts, but no luck yet.
Essentially, I want to cast the result set of the iota to an
array, during initialisation of the variable.
no, I don't want to use 'auto'. I want an array object ;-)
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 20:29:34 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
Yeah, the immutability of NNTP posts is a feature, not a bug.
but aren't git changes essentially immutable too?
as long is there is a history of the changes, there is no problem
with changes.
I'm really only interested in
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 07:09:05 UTC, zabruk70 wrote:
i don't understand whole theread.
why all import must be written on one line?
curent syntax very handy and readable.
you must have understood the thread, cause you summarised it
pretty well ;-)
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 04:22:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Why is there anything dodgy going on and why would you need
contracts? Contracts actually tend to go very badly with
generic code, because whatever they assert has to be generic,
and while that works sometimes, more often
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 04:13:15 UTC, Johannes Loher
wrote:
There are Browser extensions gor this (e.g.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/stylish-custom-themes-for/fjnbnpbmkenffdnngjfgmeleoegfcffe?hl=en)
Hey. thanks for the tip.
though..I just refuse to use chrome ;-)
(in
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 03:58:48 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Whether an implicit cast or an explicit cast makes more sense
depends entirely on what the code is doing, but either way, the
conversion needs to be forced inside the function, or you end
up with bugs. Far too often, when
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 03:43:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
That does not do what the OP requested at all. That tests
whether T is one of byte, ubyte, short, ushort, int, uint,
long, and ulong, whereas what the OP wants is to test whether T
can be cast to int.
- Jonathan M Davis
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 03:30:45 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 02:54:13 UTC, Jonathan wrote:
I am having trouble finding many useful explanations of using
template constraints beyond basic usage.
I would like to have a template constrant to enforce that
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 02:54:13 UTC, Jonathan wrote:
I am having trouble finding many useful explanations of using
template constraints beyond basic usage.
I would like to have a template constrant to enforce that a
type can be explicitly cast to another type:
void (T)(T t)
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 02:54:13 UTC, Jonathan wrote:
I am having trouble finding many useful explanations of using
template constraints beyond basic usage.
I would like to have a template constrant to enforce that a
type can be explicitly cast to another type:
void (T)(T t)
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 16:03:56 UTC, Aurélien Plazzotta
wrote:
Perhaps, we could use Backus-Naur notation, as it is already
widely known into formal documents all over the globe, like the
following:
import std.stdio, std.whatever{this, that}, std.somethingelse,
std.grr{wtf};
That
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
