On 2011-08-25 05:31, Martin Nowak wrote:
Not sure, I get what you mean.
Let me try to clarify this:
static Serializeable[TypeInfo] infos;
void register(T)() {
infos[typeid(T)] = new SerializableImpl!T();
}
// Serializable binds static reflection to dynamic interface
class SerializeableImpl!T
On 2011-08-25 06:30, Martin Nowak wrote:
It is actually already possible to store meta data in classinfos.
---
import std.stdio;
class A {
int a;
float b;
}
mixin template register(T) if(is(T == class)) {
static this() {
T.classinfo.m_offTi = [OffsetTypeInfo(0, typeid(int)), OffsetTypeInfo(4,
It is actually already possible to store meta data in classinfos.
---
import std.stdio;
class A {
int a;
float b;
}
mixin template register(T) if(is(T == class)) {
static this() {
T.classinfo.m_offTi = [OffsetTypeInfo(0, typeid(int)),
OffsetTypeInfo(4, typeid(float))];
}
}
mixin
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 08:49:19 +0200, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-24 01:34, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:03:12 +0200, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu
On 2011-08-24 10:10, Marco Leise wrote:
Then I'll clearly use Orange when I have a need for serialization. Nice
work!
Thanks.
I've taken a closer look at
http://dsource.org/projects/orange/wiki/Features and I see that
versioning is still missing. What are your plans there? What happens at
the
Am 24.08.2011, 08:58 Uhr, schrieb Jacob Carlborg :
On 2011-08-24 08:41, Marco Leise wrote:
Am 23.08.2011, 19:42 Uhr, schrieb jdrewsen :
Den 23-08-2011 17:03, Jacob Carlborg skrev:
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52
On 2011-08-24 08:41, Marco Leise wrote:
Am 23.08.2011, 19:42 Uhr, schrieb jdrewsen :
Den 23-08-2011 17:03, Jacob Carlborg skrev:
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Ja
On 2011-08-24 01:34, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:03:12 +0200, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Ok, then
On 2011-08-23 19:42, jdrewsen wrote:
Den 23-08-2011 17:03, Jacob Carlborg skrev:
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Ok, then I just change "regis
Am 23.08.2011, 19:42 Uhr, schrieb jdrewsen :
Den 23-08-2011 17:03, Jacob Carlborg skrev:
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Ok, then I just chan
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:03:12 +0200, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Ok, then I just change "register" to a static metho
Den 23-08-2011 17:03, Jacob Carlborg skrev:
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Ok, then I just change "register" to a static method.
A static me
On 2011-08-23 16:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Ok, then I just change "register" to a static method.
A static method of whom?
Andrei
Well, "register" curr
On 8/23/11 12:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Ok, then I just change "register" to a static method.
A static method of whom?
Andrei
Well, "register" currently an instance method of Serializer so I would
On 2011-08-23 08:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-22 22:26, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Yes. Better yet:
class Derived : Base
{
...
}
mixin(serializable!Derived());
i.e. so you can add serialization to classes you can't edit.
Yeah, of cou
On 8/22/11 11:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-22 22:26, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Yes. Better yet:
class Derived : Base
{
...
}
mixin(serializable!Derived());
i.e. so you can add serialization to classes you can't edit.
Yeah, of course. So "The line of code needs to be declarative
On 2011-08-22 22:00, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 08/22/2011 09:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-22 21:08, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 6:03 PM, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/21/2011 6:35 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clips
On 2011-08-22 22:27, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/22/11 2:22 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-22 21:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
FWIW I don't think D should pay the cost of reflection up-front and
compulsively for all types.
So ClassInfo.getMembers is there because?
At this point t
On 2011-08-22 22:26, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Yes. Better yet:
class Derived : Base
{
...
}
mixin(serializable!Derived());
i.e. so you can add serialization to classes you can't edit.
Yeah, of course. So "The line of code needs to be declarative,
not imperative" was just a fancy way of sa
On 8/22/11 2:22 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-22 21:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
FWIW I don't think D should pay the cost of reflection up-front and
compulsively for all types.
So ClassInfo.getMembers is there because?
At this point the implementation is unclear on what should and w
On 8/22/11 2:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-22 21:08, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 6:03 PM, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/21/2011 6:35 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlb
On 08/22/2011 09:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-22 21:08, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 6:03 PM, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/21/2011 6:35 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob C
On 2011-08-22 21:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
FWIW I don't think D should pay the cost of reflection up-front and
compulsively for all types.
So ClassInfo.getMembers is there because?
If David's code example is what you have, I don't think Orange got
"making a class serializable" properly y
On 2011-08-22 21:08, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 6:03 PM, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/21/2011 6:35 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization lib
On 8/22/11 1:41 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-22 00:35, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
ser
On 8/21/11 6:03 PM, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/21/2011 6:35 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializa
On 2011-08-22 13:27, Kagamin wrote:
Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
I already have a fully working serialization library. I'm hoping to make
it better. The problem is when (de)serializing through a base class
reference. Currently you need to register the subclass with the
serializer. If T is Base and the
On 2011-08-22 13:37, Kagamin wrote:
Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializable. I don't like the idea of annotate everything that should
be serializable.
I believe Adam Ruppe wrote serialization that works automatically.
My libr
Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
> This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
> serializable. I don't like the idea of annotate everything that should
> be serializable.
I believe Adam Ruppe wrote serialization that works automatically.
Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
> I already have a fully working serialization library. I'm hoping to make
> it better. The problem is when (de)serializing through a base class
> reference. Currently you need to register the subclass with the
> serializer. If T is Base and the actually runtime type is Su
On 2011-08-22 02:43, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:20:14 -0400, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 15:20, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 06:55:52 -0400, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class
On 2011-08-22 00:35, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializable. I don't like the idea of annotat
On 2011-08-21 21:43, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 21:21:05 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Would that be possible to do for third party types available in a
pre-compiled library?
If said types are in the .di files, sure, why not?
Otherwise, the answer is obvious... but as some
On 2011-08-21 21:07, Mehrdad wrote:
On 8/21/2011 3:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int i)
{
a = i;
}
}
auto foo = new Foo;
Object o = foo;
o.setInstanceVariable("
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:20:14 -0400, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 15:20, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 06:55:52 -0400, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int
On 8/21/2011 6:35 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializable. I don't like the idea of annota
On 8/21/11 1:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializable. I don't like the idea of annotate everything that should
be serializable.
You d
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 21:21:05 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Would that be possible to do for third party types available in a
pre-compiled library?
If said types are in the .di files, sure, why not?
Otherwise, the answer is obvious... but as someone else mentioned in this
thread, if the aut
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 12:07:17PM -0700, Mehrdad wrote:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7102648/using-dynamic-typing-in-d-a-statically-typed-language
There's an easy "fix" for that question:
blah opDispatch(string name)(blah) if ( name != "popFront" ) { }
On 8/21/2011 3:55 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int i)
{
a = i;
}
}
auto foo = new Foo;
Object o = foo;
o.setInstanceVariable("a",
On 2011-08-21 18:18, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On 2011/08/21 22:13, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:16:11 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Yes, I know. But the point is to be able to do it without the use of
mixins. It needs to work with third party types, otherwise there no
use. It als
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:05:20 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializable. I don't like the idea of annotate everything that should
be serializable.
I think you misunderstood wh
On 2011-08-21 17:30, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializable. I don't like the idea of annotate everything that should
be serializable.
You don't need to annotate it:
void serialize(T
On 2011/08/21 22:13, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:16:11 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Yes, I know. But the point is to be able to do it without the use of
mixins. It needs to work with third party types, otherwise there no
use. It also needs to work when the static type is O
On 21/08/2011 14:13, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:16:11 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Yes, I know. But the point is to be able to do it without the use of
mixins. It needs to work with third party types, otherwise there no
use. It also needs to work when the static type is O
On 21/08/2011 16:05, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializable. I don't like the idea of annotate everything that should
be serializable.
You don't need to annotate it:
void serialize(T)(T something);
You have access to all the C
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:05:20 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is for a serialization library where third party types need to be
serializable. I don't like the idea of annotate everything that should
be serializable.
I think you misunderstood what I meant. I did not imply that one would
On 2011-08-21 15:20, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 06:55:52 -0400, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int i)
{
a = i;
}
}
auto foo = new Foo;
Object o = foo
On 2011-08-21 15:13, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:16:11 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Yes, I know. But the point is to be able to do it without the use of
mixins. It needs to work with third party types, otherwise there no
use. It also needs to work when the static type is O
On 2011-08-21 14:55, Marco Leise wrote:
Am 21.08.2011, 14:11 Uhr, schrieb Jacob Carlborg :
BTW, you're already paying for the class info.
That could be a necessity of D's OOP implementation to fulfill the
specification and while it is there that data was exported. Delphi used
to have a compil
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 16:31:14 +0300, Alex Rønne Petersen
wrote:
I really don't think this is a valid cause of concern in this day and
age.
Perhaps not for you.
Look at Java and .NET. They're doing just fine even with all metadata
being available.
And that's why obfuscators exist.
Plen
On 21-08-2011 15:13, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:16:11 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Yes, I know. But the point is to be able to do it without the use of
mixins. It needs to work with third party types, otherwise there no
use. It also needs to work when the static type is O
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 06:55:52 -0400, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int i)
{
a = i;
}
}
auto foo = new Foo;
Object o = foo;
o.setInstanceVariable
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:16:11 +0300, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Yes, I know. But the point is to be able to do it without the use of
mixins. It needs to work with third party types, otherwise there no use.
It also needs to work when the static type is Object.
You're already paying for the class
Am 21.08.2011, 14:11 Uhr, schrieb Jacob Carlborg :
BTW, you're already paying for the class info.
That could be a necessity of D's OOP implementation to fulfill the
specification and while it is there that data was exported. Delphi used to
have a compiler switch to include RTTI. (If I reme
On 2011-08-21 13:42, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 21/08/2011 11:55, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int i)
{
a = i;
}
}
auto foo = new Foo;
Object o = foo;
o.setInstanceVariable
On 2011-08-21 13:41, bearophile wrote:
Jacob Carlborg:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int i)
{
a = i;
}
}
auto foo = new Foo;
Object o = foo;
o.setInstanceVariable("a", 3);
assert(foo.a == 3);
Is this related to the Delphi feature I've recentl
On 21/08/2011 11:55, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int i)
{
a = i;
}
}
auto foo = new Foo;
Object o = foo;
o.setInstanceVariable("a", 3);
assert(foo.a == 3);
Thi
Jacob Carlborg:
> class Foo
> {
> private int a;
>
> private void bar (int i)
> {
> a = i;
> }
> }
>
> auto foo = new Foo;
> Object o = foo;
> o.setInstanceVariable("a", 3);
> assert(foo.a == 3);
Is this related to the Delphi feature I've recently shown?
http://blog
What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
like this:
class Foo
{
private int a;
private void bar (int i)
{
a = i;
}
}
auto foo = new Foo;
Object o = foo;
o.setInstanceVariable("a", 3);
assert(foo.a == 3);
This would be usef
60 matches
Mail list logo
