On Sunday, 7 May 2017 at 11:46:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 5/7/17 1:30 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
To follow this discussion up, and in light of yesterday's
Collections presentation at DConf, I though I'd go ahead and
make a basic implementation of traits-based IAllocator.
You
On 5/7/17 1:30 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
To follow this discussion up, and in light of yesterday's Collections
presentation at DConf, I though I'd go ahead and make a basic
implementation of traits-based IAllocator.
You can find it here:
https://github.com/radcapricorn/alloctraits
On Monday, 1 May 2017 at 13:00:27 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 05/01/2017 08:12 AM, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
On Sunday, 30 April 2017 at 21:43:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
A pass through the root allocators (Mallocator, GCAllocator
etc)
figuring out what attributes could be
On Monday, 1 May 2017 at 07:42:19 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 22:18:54 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
Done. I also added to the README that it has its own versions
of the range constraints from Phobos that can be used with
`@models`.
Atila
Example of an error message
On 05/01/2017 10:51 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
On Monday, 1 May 2017 at 16:31:10 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
If we had a type similar to TaggedAlgebraic...
Destroy?
It's too strict: you have to specify concrete types beforehand.
No, that's why my suggestion was:
"If we had a
On Tuesday, 2 May 2017 at 02:51:02 UTC, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
Lost one else. Should be
static if (traits & (AllocatorTraits.sharedInstance |
AllocatorTraits.noGC))
@nogc shared { mixin AllocatorInterface!(); }
else static if (traits &
On Monday, 1 May 2017 at 16:31:10 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa)
wrote:
If we had a type similar to TaggedAlgebraic...
Destroy?
It's too strict: you have to specify concrete types beforehand.
This spills over into user code and makes it far less versatile
that can be achieved.
Currently
On 04/30/2017 05:39 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The allocators design is interesting in that it has a full DbI core, on
top of which resides a thin dynamically-type interface (IAllocator and
ISharedAllocator). We're still exploring the idioms enabled by this
interaction. -- Andrei
I assume
On 05/01/2017 08:12 AM, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
On Sunday, 30 April 2017 at 21:43:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
A pass through the root allocators (Mallocator, GCAllocator etc)
figuring out what attributes could be meaningfully attached would be
welcome. The rest would rely on inference.
On Sunday, 30 April 2017 at 21:43:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
A pass through the root allocators (Mallocator, GCAllocator
etc) figuring out what attributes could be meaningfully
attached would be welcome. The rest would rely on inference.
Thanks,
Andrei
IAllocator being fully
On Monday, 1 May 2017 at 04:54:28 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 4/30/17 8:43 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
On Sunday, 30 April 2017 at 21:43:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 04/27/2017 07:35 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
IAllocator is too high level an interface, it doesn't carry
any
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 22:18:54 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
Done. I also added to the README that it has its own versions
of the range constraints from Phobos that can be used with
`@models`.
Atila
Example of an error message in the README would be great too.
On 4/30/17 8:43 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
On Sunday, 30 April 2017 at 21:43:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 04/27/2017 07:35 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
IAllocator is too high level an interface, it doesn't carry any
information as to what type of memory it can allocate (so we can only
On Monday, 1 May 2017 at 00:43:22 UTC, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
block_ = allocator_.allocate(T.sizeof);
Obviously, should be Block.sizeof, and
AllocatorInterface!AllocTraits allocator_;
should be AllocatorInterface!traits allocator_
On Sunday, 30 April 2017 at 21:43:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 04/27/2017 07:35 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
IAllocator is too high level an interface, it doesn't carry any
information as to what type of memory it can allocate (so we
can only
assume unshared), and does or does it not
On 04/27/2017 07:35 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
IAllocator is too high level an interface, it doesn't carry any
information as to what type of memory it can allocate (so we can only
assume unshared), and does or does it not use GC (so we can only assume
GC).
Initially all fresh memory is
On 04/27/2017 07:12 PM, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 20:04:32 UTC, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 19:57:52 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5355
Andrei
And then we'd probably need INoGCAllocator and
On 04/27/2017 04:04 PM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 19:57:52 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5355
Andrei
And then we'd probably need INoGCAllocator and ISharedNOGCAllocator...
"shared" is a type qualifier essentially changing
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 18:04:06 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:09:22 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
https://github.com/atilaneves/concepts
import concepts;
@models!(isForwardRange, MyType)
struct MyType { }
Atila
I remember you had posted about this last year. It
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 17:09:22 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
https://github.com/atilaneves/concepts
import concepts;
@models!(isForwardRange, MyType)
struct MyType { }
Atila
I remember you had posted about this last year. It looks like
you've added some stuff on ranges to it
On 04/28/2017 01:09 PM, Atila Neves wrote:
https://github.com/atilaneves/concepts
import concepts;
@models!(isForwardRange, MyType)
struct MyType { }
Hmm, close, but if I'm reading the source right, it looks like a type
doesn't have to use the UDA in order for isXXX or "static
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 01:12:39 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
On 04/27/2017 07:12 PM, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
Wasn't one major selling point of compile time introspection /
duck
typing that we could stop using interfaces such... naming
schemes?
Not that I speak for everyone,
On 04/27/2017 07:12 PM, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
Wasn't one major selling point of compile time introspection / duck
typing that we could stop using interfaces such... naming schemes?
Not that I speak for everyone, but the way I see it, no, the duck typing
aspect is just something that's to be
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 23:12:48 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 20:04:32 UTC, Stanislav Blinov
wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 19:57:52 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5355
Andrei
And then we'd probably need
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 20:04:32 UTC, Stanislav Blinov
wrote:
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 19:57:52 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5355
Andrei
And then we'd probably need INoGCAllocator and
ISharedNOGCAllocator...
Wasn't one major selling point
On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 19:57:52 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5355
Andrei
And then we'd probably need INoGCAllocator and
ISharedNOGCAllocator...
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5355
Andrei
27 matches
Mail list logo
