On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP should
occur in this thread. Due to DConf taking place
On Friday, 12 May 2017 at 14:02:20 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Saturday, April 22, 2017 11:54:08 Mike Parker via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
All review-related feedback on and
On Saturday, April 22, 2017 11:54:08 Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
>
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
>
> All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP should
> occur in this thread. Due to DConf
On Saturday, 6 May 2017 at 10:38:25 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP
should occur in this thread. Due to DConf taking place during
the review period, the period will be extended by a
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP should
occur in this thread. Due to DConf taking place during the
review period, the period will be extended by a week. The
review period will end at 11:59 PM ET on May 13
On Sunday, 23 April 2017 at 12:03:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 4/22/17 4:52 PM, Joakim wrote:
Why is this still up for review?
Mostly out of a sense of conformity. We asked Michael to give
no special treatment of DIPs originating from us, and this one
was open, so he put it up for
On Sunday, 23 April 2017 at 19:25:09 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
With this syntax, the import is executed only if the declared
name (process) is actually looked up.
I don't believe the workaround with the `from` template fixes
this.
Not sure what DMD does, but SDC sure would do it only if
On Sunday, 23 April 2017 at 16:39:35 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
It's just one per module. Templates are only instantiated once
per new set of arguments. There may be some gain here, but I
doubt this is worth adding a new language feature.
Ah, good point.
Though there's still merit to this DIP
On Sunday, 23 April 2017 at 12:03:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 4/22/17 4:52 PM, Joakim wrote:
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
All
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
Destroy!
I'm not per se against going there but there are 2 points that
needs to be considered. The first one is the "self important
lookup" which obviate the need for this DIP to some extent.
Second, if we are going to
On Sunday, 23 April 2017 at 12:34:34 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On Sunday, 23 April 2017 at 12:03:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Mostly out of a sense of conformity. We asked Michael to give
no special treatment of DIPs originating from us, and this one
was open, so he put it up for
On 2017-04-23 14:03, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Mostly out of a sense of conformity. We asked Michael to give no special
treatment of DIPs originating from us, and this one was open, so he put
it up for review. It is likely it will end up rejected in favor of
On Sunday, 23 April 2017 at 12:03:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Mostly out of a sense of conformity. We asked Michael to give
no special treatment of DIPs originating from us, and this one
was open, so he put it up for review. It is likely it will end
up rejected in favor of
On 4/22/17 4:52 PM, Joakim wrote:
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP should occur
in this
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP should
occur in this thread. Due to DConf taking place
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 16:14:29 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
Please reconsider. This is new syntax. It looks like old syntax
but behaves differently.
I suppose the biggest issue is:
-
module mod;
import std.stdio;
struct A
{
~this ( ) { writeln("dtor"); }
}
-
-
module test;
On 22.04.2017 18:25, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 16:13:20 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
This is how it works for static if, and it is also how it will work
for static foreach, so it is even consistent with other language
features.
So you will touch up your static foreach DIP ?
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 16:13:20 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
This is how it works for static if, and it is also how it will
work for static foreach, so it is even consistent with other
language features.
So you will touch up your static foreach DIP ?
If so I am okay with building the
On 22.04.2017 18:17, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 22.04.2017 17:16, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
with (Type) and with (TemplateInstance) are always declarations and do
not introduce a
On 22.04.2017 17:16, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
with (Type) and with (TemplateInstance) are always declarations and do
not introduce a new scope.
Does that mean we can now
On 22.04.2017 17:31, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
Very solid DIP! And I like the use of `with` and it's proposed extension
to be allowed in declarations, rather than introducing
On 22.04.2017 13:54, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP should occur in
this thread. Due to DConf taking place during the review period, the
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
Very solid DIP! And I like the use of `with` and it's proposed
extension to be allowed in declarations, rather than introducing
new syntax.
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
with (Type) and with (TemplateInstance) are always declarations
and do not introduce a new scope.
Does that mean we can now do things like this?:
-
module m;
struct
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 11:54:08 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
Oh, this is huge, great work! Many thanks to all authors! --Ilya
The first preliminary review of Andrei's DIP,
"Dependency-Carrying Declarations", has begun. Please submit all
feedback to the review thread [1].
[1]
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ckqhwodtjgpcqklcy...@forum.dlang.org
Also, please remember that the Round 1 review of DIP 1006 [2]
ends this
DIP 1005 is titled "Dependency-Carrying Declarations".
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1005.md
All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP should
occur in this thread. Due to DConf taking place during the review
period, the period will be extended by a week. The
27 matches
Mail list logo
