On Sunday, 25 March 2012 at 17:31:45 UTC, bearophile wrote:
I think that one of the most important things to underscore is
that we would have never found these things so early unless we
had written the Rust compiler in Rust itself. It forces us to
use the language constantly, and we quickly
On 08/21/2014 09:39 AM, eles wrote:
On Sunday, 25 March 2012 at 17:31:45 UTC, bearophile wrote:
I think that one of the most important things to underscore is that
we would have never found these things so early unless we had written
the Rust compiler in Rust itself. It forces us to use the
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 07:53:40 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
On 08/21/2014 09:39 AM, eles wrote:
On Sunday, 25 March 2012 at 17:31:45 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Time to ask this again?
AFAIK, ddmd is well underway and is pretty much in an
alpha-state now.
More precisely, I was asking this:
On Sunday, 25 March 2012 at 19:21:12 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I don't see a reason for programmers to spend 10 years suffering
in the wilderness to learn to avoid making certain kinds of
mistakes.
I couldn't agree more.
eles wrote in message news:hojvezprzeaqqceml...@forum.dlang.org...
AFAIK, ddmd is well underway and is pretty much in an
alpha-state now.
More precisely, I was asking this:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/jko1cn$1s5v$1...@digitalmars.com
The old DDMD project is no longer relevant.
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 10:02:44 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
eles wrote in message
news:hojvezprzeaqqceml...@forum.dlang.org...
AFAIK, ddmd is well underway and is pretty much in an
alpha-state now.
More precisely, I was asking this:
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 11:29:57 UTC, AsmMan wrote:
On Thursday, 21 August 2014 at 10:02:44 UTC, Daniel Murphy
wrote:
eles wrote in message
news:hojvezprzeaqqceml...@forum.dlang.org...
AFAIK, ddmd is well underway and is pretty much in an
alpha-state now.
More precisely, I was
AsmMan wrote in message news:vhlbrdptvpygtyyhp...@forum.dlang.org...
On quick read I can't find the reason. Why is no longer relevant?
Because it is dead, and we're automatically converting the C++ frontend to
D. It will soon replace the C++ frontend in dmd.
BitC has tried to become a verified system language, but its author has decided
to stop its development because of some problems that he has described in a
post.
This is a thread of discussions about that post:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3749860
One of the most interesting comments is
On 03/25/2012 07:31 PM, bearophile wrote:
...
So we moved to a monomorphization scheme for Rust 0.2, which is basically like
C++ template instantiation, only without the overhead of reparsing all the code from
scratch.
What are doing D/DMD regarding this?
D templates do not require
On 3/25/2012 10:31 AM, bearophile wrote:
One more disadvantage of not using D (or a language safer than C/C++) to
implement a safe language as D is that the compiler will have many more bugs,
so while you program in the implemented language (D) you will find many D
compiler bugs. Today I think
Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote in message
news:jknr78$1g8q$1...@digitalmars.com...
So why hasn't dmd been subject to all sorts of safety errors (like buffer
overruns, uninitialized pointers, etc.)?
Because you're cleverly using very D-like C++ ;)
On 26 March 2012 08:41, Nick Sabalausky a@a.a wrote:
Because you're cleverly using very D-like C++ ;)
Unsurprising from, you know, the creator of D...
That said, having a D compiler in D would be cool, simply because
every language needs a bootstrapped compiler :P. Also, their are other
Le 25/03/2012 22:38, James Miller a écrit :
On 26 March 2012 08:41, Nick Sabalauskya@a.a wrote:
Because you're cleverly using very D-like C++ ;)
Unsurprising from, you know, the creator of D...
That said, having a D compiler in D would be cool, simply because
every language needs a
On 26 March 2012 09:49, deadalnix deadal...@gmail.com wrote:
ddmd seems to provide a working frontend written in D. I think this project
should be more promoted (eventually become the main d frontend ?).
I have seen it, and it looks good. But there are reasons why the DMD
front-end is in C++,
On 03/25/2012 10:49 PM, deadalnix wrote:
Le 25/03/2012 22:38, James Miller a écrit :
On 26 March 2012 08:41, Nick Sabalauskya@a.a wrote:
Because you're cleverly using very D-like C++ ;)
Unsurprising from, you know, the creator of D...
That said, having a D compiler in D would be cool,
deadalnix deadal...@gmail.com wrote in message
news:jko00q$1pif$1...@digitalmars.com...
Le 25/03/2012 22:38, James Miller a écrit :
On 26 March 2012 08:41, Nick Sabalauskya@a.a wrote:
Because you're cleverly using very D-like C++ ;)
Unsurprising from, you know, the creator of D...
That
On 03/25/2012 12:41 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Walter Brightnewshou...@digitalmars.com wrote in message
news:jknr78$1g8q$1...@digitalmars.com...
So why hasn't dmd been subject to all sorts of safety errors (like buffer
overruns, uninitialized pointers, etc.)?
Because you're cleverly using
18 matches
Mail list logo
