Lionello Lunesu:
I've closed the valueRange PR because I now think it's not a
good idea, since the values it returns are not stable and any
code using it can break in the future as VRP gets smarter. The
obvious cases (valueRange of ubyte returning 0 and 255 resp.)
can already be tested by
On 30/06/14 15:27, bearophile wrote:
Lionello Lunesu:
I've closed the valueRange PR because I now think it's not a good
idea, since the values it returns are not stable and any code using it
can break in the future as VRP gets smarter. The obvious cases
(valueRange of ubyte returning 0 and 255
On 26/06/14 18:38, bearophile wrote:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3679
This introduces __traits(valueRange, expr), and I think it introduces
range values to the ?: expressions too.
The __traits(valueRange, expr) is meant to be useful for debugging
On 2014-06-26 16:37, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
This is probably because without -D, the entire ddoc code doesn't even
run (which probably saves on compilation time), and comments are not
kept by the parser/lexer, so by the time the compiler evaluates
__traits(comment...), it doesn't
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 10:38:54 UTC, bearophile wrot
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3615
Will allow very handy, more DRY and less bug-prone like this:
// static array type
int[$] a1 = [1,2];// int[2]
auto[$] a2 = [3,4,5]; // int[3]
const[$] a3 = [6,7,8]; //
On Thursday, June 26, 2014 17:45:23 Meta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 17:26:02 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Meta:
There has been discussion before about doing away with string
lambdas. Maybe this is a good time to do that.
If they get deprecated I will have to
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 03:24:36PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Thursday, June 26, 2014 17:45:23 Meta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 17:26:02 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Meta:
There has been discussion before about doing away with string
On Friday, 27 June 2014 at 22:31:57 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
I don't know if any further progress has been made since then,
though.
I've yet to see a pull request for it, so I'd assume that there
hasn't.
For people that are not following closely what's happening in
GitHub, there are some nice or very nice patches waiting to be
fixed and/or accepted, among the last ones:
This proposes a __traits(documentation, expr):
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3531
On 2014-06-26 10:38:53 +, bearophile said:
For people that are not following closely what's happening in GitHub,
there are some nice or very nice patches waiting to be fixed and/or
accepted, among the last ones:
This proposes a __traits(documentation, expr):
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 10:38:54 UTC, bearophile wrote:
// pointer type
auto* p1 = new int(3); // int*
const* p2 = new int(3); // const(int)*
Won't some people, especially those coming from C++, mistake this
for being syntax to create a constant pointer to a mutable int?
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 10:52:22 UTC, Shammah Chancellor
wrote:
On 2014-06-26 10:38:53 +, bearophile said:
For people that are not following closely what's happening in
GitHub, there are some nice or very nice patches waiting to be
fixed and/or accepted, among the last ones:
...
Meta:
const* p2 = new int(3); // const(int)*
Won't some people, especially those coming from C++, mistake
this for being syntax to create a constant pointer to a mutable
int?
C/C++ const is very different from D one (transitive), so C++
programmers must learn the differences.
If a C++
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:38:53AM +, bearophile via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
This proposes a __traits(documentation, expr):
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3531
Something similar is used in Python and Lisp, it allows to introspect
the
H. S. Teoh:
What's wrong with just writing auto?
auto sqr = a = a^^2;
auto r = [1,2,3].map!sqr;
auto is used to use the type of the value on the right. But a =
a^^2 is not a value, it can't be assigned to a variable, because
it's not a lambda.
To use auto you need to give
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 02:45:05PM +, bearophile via Digitalmars-d wrote:
H. S. Teoh:
What's wrong with just writing auto?
auto sqr = a = a^^2;
auto r = [1,2,3].map!sqr;
auto is used to use the type of the value on the right. But a =
a^^2 is not a value, it can't be
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 10:38:54 UTC, bearophile wrote:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3638
Allows to write code like:
void main() {
import std.algorithm;
alias sqr = a = a ^^ 2;
auto r = [1, 2, 3].map!sqr;
}
So if this pull request gets merged, should
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 16:05:24 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Meta:
So if this pull request gets merged, should we deprecate
std.functional.unaryFun and binaryFun? I don't see much need
for them with this pull merged.
perhaps unaryFun is to convert the strings like q{a * a}.
Bye,
bearophile
Meta:
So if this pull request gets merged, should we deprecate
std.functional.unaryFun and binaryFun? I don't see much need
for them with this pull merged.
perhaps unaryFun is to convert the strings like q{a * a}.
Bye,
bearophile
Meta:
There has been discussion before about doing away with string
lambdas. Maybe this is a good time to do that.
If they get deprecated I will have to manually fix a _ton_ of
code :-)
Bye,
bearophile
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 17:26:02 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Meta:
There has been discussion before about doing away with string
lambdas. Maybe this is a good time to do that.
If they get deprecated I will have to manually fix a _ton_ of
code :-)
Bye,
bearophile
I guess instead of
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 05:45:23PM +, Meta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 17:26:02 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Meta:
There has been discussion before about doing away with string
lambdas. Maybe this is a good time to do that.
If they get deprecated I will have to
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 10:38:54 UTC, bearophile wrote:
For people that are not following closely what's happening in
GitHub, there are some nice or very nice patches waiting to be
fixed and/or accepted
I'm pretty biased, but am quite excited about:
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 18:55:38 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Care to submit a PR to remove mentions of string lambdas from
the Phobos
docs? They're still all over the place.
I feel like this is a bad idea, we shouldn't be deleting
documentation. It will just end up causing
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 19:30:38 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 18:55:38 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Care to submit a PR to remove mentions of string lambdas from
the Phobos
docs? They're still all over the place.
I feel like this is a bad idea, we
Sean Kelly:
I'm pretty biased, but am quite excited about:
Mine was only a partial list :-)
void main() {
auto r = new Generator!string({
yield(the);
yield(quick);
yield(brown);
yield(fox);
});
Do you need the new there? Is that a
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 19:42:46 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Sean Kelly:
I'm pretty biased, but am quite excited about:
Mine was only a partial list :-)
void main() {
auto r = new Generator!string({
yield(the);
yield(quick);
yield(brown);
yield(fox);
On 6/26/2014 5:38 AM, bearophile wrote:
For people that are not following closely what's happening in GitHub,
there are some nice or very nice patches waiting to be fixed and/or
accepted, among the last ones:
While we're on the subject, I've been meaning to make a post about it,
but just
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 16:21:24 -0400, Orvid King blah38...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/26/2014 5:38 AM, bearophile wrote:
For people that are not following closely what's happening in GitHub,
there are some nice or very nice patches waiting to be fixed and/or
accepted, among the last ones:
While
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 20:36:01 UTC, Meta wrote:
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 18:55:38 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Care to submit a PR to remove mentions of string lambdas from
the Phobos
docs? They're still all over the place.
Sure, as soon as it gets merged.
I mean the
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 18:55:38 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Care to submit a PR to remove mentions of string lambdas from
the Phobos
docs? They're still all over the place.
Sure, as soon as it gets merged.
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 04:27:16PM -0400, Steven Schveighoffer via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 16:21:24 -0400, Orvid King blah38...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/26/2014 5:38 AM, bearophile wrote:
For people that are not following closely what's happening in
GitHub, there are some nice
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 18:55:38 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 05:45:23PM +, Meta via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thursday, 26 June 2014 at 17:26:02 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Meta:
There has been discussion before about doing away with string
lambdas.
Here are some of the items I voted on that I see have been
resolved:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1528
overloading template and non-template functions
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5700
Allow dup in nothrow functions
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5893
Allow
34 matches
Mail list logo
