On 11/12/11 12:59, Andrew Gough wrote:
On Mon, 05 Dec 2011 08:21:45 +0100
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-12-04 21:46, Andrew Wiley wrote:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Jonathan M
Davis wrote:
On Sunday, December 04, 2011 01:24:02 Andrew Wiley wrote:
This should work, right? I'm not just
On Mon, 05 Dec 2011 08:21:45 +0100
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2011-12-04 21:46, Andrew Wiley wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Jonathan M
> > Davis wrote:
> >> On Sunday, December 04, 2011 01:24:02 Andrew Wiley wrote:
> >>> This should work, right? I'm not just going crazy or something?
On 12/5/11 11:55 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/4/11 4:32 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
In that case, no object copying is occurring, and I have message
passing for immutable objects working, although my current solution is
basically to che
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> On 12/4/11 4:32 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
>>
>> In that case, no object copying is occurring, and I have message
>> passing for immutable objects working, although my current solution is
>> basically to check whether the object is immutabl
On 05/12/11 18:48, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-12-05 08:25, Graham St Jack wrote:
I always use arrays or structs. Until the tail-const thing (or something
like it) happens, classes don't seem to be viable in messages between
threads.
You can always serialize the object, if a copy is accepta
On 12/05/2011 02:24 PM, Jason House wrote:
Timon Gehr Wrote:
On 12/05/2011 02:16 AM, Graham St Jack wrote:
What is the status of the immutable(Object) ref proposal? Is it on the
list of things to do, or is it ruled out? If it is ruled out, then what
is the superior proposal?
It is not full
Timon Gehr Wrote:
> On 12/05/2011 02:16 AM, Graham St Jack wrote:
> >
> > What is the status of the immutable(Object) ref proposal? Is it on the
> > list of things to do, or is it ruled out? If it is ruled out, then what
> > is the superior proposal?
> >
>
> It is not fully implemented and appare
On 12/05/2011 02:56 AM, bearophile wrote:
Timon Gehr:
It is not fully implemented and apparently Walter would like a different
solution, because it is quite ugly.
Do you know why it is ugly?
Bye,
bearophile
It overloads the 'ref' keyword with an unrelated meaning.
And furthermore:
auto x
On 2011-12-05 08:25, Graham St Jack wrote:
I always use arrays or structs. Until the tail-const thing (or something
like it) happens, classes don't seem to be viable in messages between
threads.
You can always serialize the object, if a copy is acceptable.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 05/12/11 17:51, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-12-04 21:46, Andrew Wiley wrote:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Jonathan M
Davis wrote:
On Sunday, December 04, 2011 01:24:02 Andrew Wiley wrote:
This should work, right? I'm not just going crazy or something?
import std.concurrency;
import s
On 2011-12-04 21:46, Andrew Wiley wrote:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, December 04, 2011 01:24:02 Andrew Wiley wrote:
This should work, right? I'm not just going crazy or something?
import std.concurrency;
import std.stdio;
class Bob {
}
void main() {
On 12/4/11 4:32 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
In that case, no object copying is occurring, and I have message
passing for immutable objects working, although my current solution is
basically to check whether the object is immutable, and if so, memcpy
the reference. That breaks immutability, but only f
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 12/04/2011 11:32 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/4/11 4:16 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
>>>
So it looks like right now, message passing is copying objects, which
Timon Gehr:
> It is not fully implemented and apparently Walter would like a different
> solution, because it is quite ugly.
Do you know why it is ugly?
Bye,
bearophile
On 12/05/2011 02:16 AM, Graham St Jack wrote:
My vote is for something like immutable(Object) ref, as Andrew suggested
earlier. This would allow mutable references to immutable objects to be
passed through a message channel without nasty typecasting.
std.typecons.Rebindable has always been an ug
On Monday, December 05, 2011 11:46:29 Graham St Jack wrote:
> My vote is for something like immutable(Object) ref, as Andrew suggested
> earlier. This would allow mutable references to immutable objects to be
> passed through a message channel without nasty typecasting.
>
> std.typecons.Rebindable
My vote is for something like immutable(Object) ref, as Andrew suggested
earlier. This would allow mutable references to immutable objects to be
passed through a message channel without nasty typecasting.
std.typecons.Rebindable has always been an ugly hack that doesn't quite
do the job. Certa
On 12/04/2011 11:32 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/4/11 4:16 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
So it looks like right now, message passing is copying objects, which
seems very bad. Check this out:
import std.stdio;
import std.concurren
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> On 12/4/11 4:16 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
>>
>> So it looks like right now, message passing is copying objects, which
>> seems very bad. Check this out:
>>
>> import std.stdio;
>> import std.concurrency;
>>
>> class Bob {
>> }
>>
On 12/4/11 4:16 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
So it looks like right now, message passing is copying objects, which
seems very bad. Check this out:
import std.stdio;
import std.concurrency;
class Bob {
}
void main() {
auto tid = spawn(&func);
auto bob = new shared(Bob)();
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Andrew Wiley wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> On Sunday, December 04, 2011 01:24:02 Andrew Wiley wrote:
>>> This should work, right? I'm not just going crazy or something?
>>>
>>> import std.concurrency;
>>> import std.stdio;
>>>
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Sunday, December 04, 2011 01:24:02 Andrew Wiley wrote:
>> This should work, right? I'm not just going crazy or something?
>>
>> import std.concurrency;
>> import std.stdio;
>>
>> class Bob {
>> }
>>
>> void main() {
>> auto tid = spa
On Sunday, December 04, 2011 01:24:02 Andrew Wiley wrote:
> This should work, right? I'm not just going crazy or something?
>
> import std.concurrency;
> import std.stdio;
>
> class Bob {
> }
>
> void main() {
> auto tid = spawn(&b);
> tid.send(new immutable(Bob)());
> }
>
> void b() {
This should work, right? I'm not just going crazy or something?
import std.concurrency;
import std.stdio;
class Bob {
}
void main() {
auto tid = spawn(&b);
tid.send(new immutable(Bob)());
}
void b() {
receive(
(immutable(Bob) b) {
writeln("got it");
}
24 matches
Mail list logo
