On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 02:51:44 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Reminds of a certain individual who shall remain unnamed, with
whom I
argued about why he should *not* implement IPv6 prefix checking
by
converting the address and prefixes to strings and then using
strncmp()... Truly boggles the
Stuart wrote in message news:nnyvtncaxpgnjtklv...@forum.dlang.org...
On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 15:56:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 14:49, schrieb Stuart:
On Saturday, 21 July 2012 at 22:16:52 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
C++ is living in the 70's.
Precisely what I have been
Nick Sabalausky wrote in message news:20120723171909.0527@unknown...
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:19 +0200
Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 15:56:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 14:49, schrieb Stuart:
On Saturday, 21 July 2012 at 22:16:52 UTC, Nick
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 08:40:13 +0200
Chris NS ibisbase...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 02:51:44 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Reminds of a certain individual who shall remain unnamed, with
whom I
argued about why he should *not* implement IPv6 prefix checking
by
converting
David Nadlinger wrote:
On Sunday, 22 July 2012 at 03:06:28 UTC, Jens Mueller wrote:
Where is argmin defined? I couldn't find it.
On the slide before that… ;)
:)
Jens
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 04:21:18 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Tuple!(float, x, float, y) bar() {
return typeof(return)( 0.0, 0.0 );
}
[snip]
We could make
return tuple(0.0, 0.0);
to work. I can't imagine a scenario in which this relaxation would cause
a
On Tuesday, July 24, 2012 11:03:16 Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 04:21:18 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Tuple!(float, x, float, y) bar() {
return typeof(return)( 0.0, 0.0 );
}
[snip]
We could make
return tuple(0.0, 0.0);
to
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 13:00:44 +0200, Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com
wrote:
On Tuesday, July 24, 2012 11:03:16 Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 04:21:18 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Tuple!(float, x, float, y) bar() {
return typeof(return)(
On 7/24/12 5:03 AM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 04:21:18 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Tuple!(float, x, float, y) bar() {
return typeof(return)( 0.0, 0.0 );
}
[snip]
We could make
return tuple(0.0, 0.0);
to work. I can't imagine a scenario in
On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 21:14:31 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:19 +0200, Stuart stu...@gmx.com
wrote:
Saves us having to create a struct for every goddamn little
function; or using tuples directly, which means we have to
refer to variables like .value1 and .value2
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 15:42:19 +0100, Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 21:14:31 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:19 +0200, Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
Saves us having to create a struct for every goddamn little function;
or using tuples directly,
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 03:49:14PM +0100, Regan Heath wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 15:42:19 +0100, Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
[...]
You mean it's already supported? Nice! Although, It'd still be
awesome to be able to do things like:
auto a,b = bar();
auto c,_ = bar();
Sadly the
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 16:42:19 +0200, Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
You mean it's already supported? Nice!
That's what I mean. :p
Although, It'd still be awesome to be able to do things like:
auto a,b = bar();
auto c,_ = bar();
That would be nice, and has been on the table
On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 14:50:02 UTC, Regan Heath wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 15:42:19 +0100, Stuart stu...@gmx.com
wrote:
You mean it's already supported? Nice! Although, It'd still be
awesome to be able to do things like:
auto a,b = bar();
auto c,_ = bar();
Sadly the comma
On 07/24/2012 07:42 AM, Stuart wrote:
You mean it's already supported? Nice! Although, It'd still be awesome
to be able to do things like:
auto a,b = bar();
auto c,_ = bar();
Works in foreach loops:
foreach (a, b; hasTupleElements)
The element type of the following range of map
On 7/24/12, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
The comma operator must go.
The comma operator needs to die a fast but painful death. I've had
this sort of bug recently:
int getInt(string op)
{
if (op, a)
return 1;
else
if (op == b)
return 2;
else
On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 16:59 +0200, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
[…]
...which inspired me to write this implementation of fibonacci:
T fib(T = int)(int n, T a = 0, T b = 1) {
while ( n-- ) {
TypeTuple!(a,b) = tuple(b, a +b);
}
return a;
}
Or possibly better:
long
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 19:02:07 +0200, Russel Winder rus...@winder.org.uk
wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 16:59 +0200, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
[…]
...which inspired me to write this implementation of fibonacci:
T fib(T = int)(int n, T a = 0, T b = 1) {
while ( n-- ) {
TypeTuple!(a,b)
On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 06:40:14 UTC, Chris NS wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 02:51:44 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Reminds of a certain individual who shall remain unnamed, with
whom I argued about why he should *not* implement IPv6 prefix
checking by converting the address and prefixes
On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 22:38:07 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
documented' because they couldn't understand what were for.
Sorry my filter stripped that out. They couldn't understand what
and were for.
On 7/24/12 6:48 PM, Era Scarecrow wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 22:38:07 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
documented' because they couldn't understand what were for.
Sorry my filter stripped that out. They couldn't understand what and
were for.
x = 2; // if x much greater than 2, assign 2
On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 22:38:07 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
[code]
//remember, java
String toGuid(byte input[16]) {
String ID = {;
if (Integer.toHexString(input[5]).length 2)
ID = ID + 0;
ID = ID + Integer.toHexString(input[5]);
if (Integer.toHexString(input[6]).length 2)
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 03:52:28 +0200
Chris NS ibisbase...@gmail.com wrote:
Erm, so that I'm not completely off-topic: I know where D has
truly gone wrong. There's just too many damn semi-colons!
Nah, I know exactly where it went wrong.
Albuquerque.
Shoulda gone left.
I've only recently discovered D, and I already think it's great.
I mean, where else am I going to find a language that [a]
compiles to native code, [b] has classes, [c] has no stupid
flat-file #include system, and [d] has a GC? Honestly, I can't
think of any others!
I really don't understand
On Sunday, 22 July 2012 at 21:10:08 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/22/12 12:32 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Sunday, 22 July 2012 at 03:06:28 UTC, Jens Mueller wrote:
Where is argmin defined? I couldn't find it.
On the slide before that… ;)
I think argmin is intuitive, popular, and
On Saturday, 21 July 2012 at 22:16:52 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
C++ is living in the 70's.
Precisely what I have been thinking. It's a loose wrapper around
assembly, nothing more. Certainly not the high-level language
it's touted as.
Am 23.07.2012 14:49, schrieb Stuart:
On Saturday, 21 July 2012 at 22:16:52 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
C++ is living in the 70's.
Precisely what I have been thinking. It's a loose wrapper around
assembly, nothing more. Certainly not the high-level language
it's touted as.
Only due to the
On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 15:56:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 14:49, schrieb Stuart:
On Saturday, 21 July 2012 at 22:16:52 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
C++ is living in the 70's.
Precisely what I have been thinking. It's a loose wrapper
around
assembly, nothing more. Certainly
On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 20:51:19 UTC, Stuart wrote:
Incidentally, it'd be really handy to have anonymous tuples in
D.
Or perhaps I should've said named tuples. I dunno what the
correct term might be. All I know is, I've only seen it in one or
two obscure languages, and I've always wished
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:19 +0200, Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
Saves us having to create a struct for every goddamn little function; or
using tuples directly, which means we have to refer to variables like
.value1 and .value2 instead of something meaningful.
You mean like this?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:19 +0200
Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 15:56:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 14:49, schrieb Stuart:
On Saturday, 21 July 2012 at 22:16:52 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
C++ is living in the 70's.
Precisely what I have been
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 17:19:09 -0400
Nick Sabalausky seewebsitetocontac...@semitwist.com wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:19 +0200
Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 15:56:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 14:49, schrieb Stuart:
On Saturday, 21 July 2012 at
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 20:24:19 +0200
Paulo Pinto pj...@progtools.org wrote:
Am 22.07.2012 00:16, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 23:14:12 +0200
Stuartstu...@gmx.com wrote:
Let me just add, I really *like* the terse syntax of D. Lambdas,
uniform function call syntax, and so
On 7/23/12 5:14 PM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:19 +0200, Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
Saves us having to create a struct for every goddamn little function;
or using tuples directly, which means we have to refer to variables
like .value1 and .value2 instead of something
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:00:24PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 20:24:19 +0200
Paulo Pinto pj...@progtools.org wrote:
[...]
The type of programmer clogs we have in our projects are so low
skill, that I have bad dreams what they could do in more powerfull
languages.
On Sunday, 22 July 2012 at 03:06:28 UTC, Jens Mueller wrote:
Where is argmin defined? I couldn't find it.
Jens
Argmin don't exist, but it could, and that's what counts. The
important thing in these slides is proof of concept, rather than
actual code snippets.
However, std.algorithm does
On Sunday, 22 July 2012 at 03:06:28 UTC, Jens Mueller wrote:
Where is argmin defined? I couldn't find it.
On the slide before that… ;)
David
Am 22.07.2012 00:16, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 23:14:12 +0200
Stuartstu...@gmx.com wrote:
Let me just add, I really *like* the terse syntax of D. Lambdas,
uniform function call syntax, and so on.
Yea. I used Java in college and ever since then I've been a fan of
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 20:24:19 +0200
Paulo Pinto pj...@progtools.org wrote:
Am 22.07.2012 00:16, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 23:14:12 +0200
Stuartstu...@gmx.com wrote:
Let me just add, I really *like* the terse syntax of D. Lambdas,
uniform function call syntax, and so
On 7/22/12 12:32 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Sunday, 22 July 2012 at 03:06:28 UTC, Jens Mueller wrote:
Where is argmin defined? I couldn't find it.
On the slide before that… ;)
I think argmin is intuitive, popular, and useful enough to warrant a
presence in std.algorithm. Would anyone
Am 22.07.2012 21:28, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 20:24:19 +0200
Paulo Pintopj...@progtools.org wrote:
Am 22.07.2012 00:16, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 23:14:12 +0200
Stuartstu...@gmx.com wrote:
Let me just add, I really *like* the terse syntax of D.
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 23:15:06 +0200
Paulo Pinto pj...@progtools.org wrote:
Am 22.07.2012 21:28, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 20:24:19 +0200
Paulo Pintopj...@progtools.org wrote:
Am 22.07.2012 00:16, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 23:14:12 +0200
Am Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:43:18 +0200
schrieb Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com:
On 2012-07-20 16:33, Marco Leise wrote:
I think C++ uses a pragmatic approach: No overhead for explicit
initialization. But everything that goes into the executable and doesn't
have a specific value, will go into
Let me just add, I really *like* the terse syntax of D. Lambdas,
uniform function call syntax, and so on.
Although the most important difference between C++ and D, in my
opinion, is the absence of the damn #include statement!! That
archaic assembly-language-inspired way of cramming billions
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 23:14:12 +0200
Stuart stu...@gmx.com wrote:
Let me just add, I really *like* the terse syntax of D. Lambdas,
uniform function call syntax, and so on.
Yea. I used Java in college and ever since then I've been a fan of
non-verbose systax - ie syntax that's the *opposite* of
On 7/21/12 6:16 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Yea. I used Java in college and ever since then I've been a fan of
non-verbose systax - ie syntax that's the *opposite* of Java ;)
On slide 19 of the OSCON slides there's this sample:
auto s = [abc, a, xz];
auto m = s.argmin!((x) = x.length);
People
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 18:24:04 -0400
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 7/21/12 6:16 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Yea. I used Java in college and ever since then I've been a fan of
non-verbose systax - ie syntax that's the *opposite* of Java ;)
On slide 19 of the
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 18:24:04 -0400
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 7/21/12 6:16 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Yea. I used Java in college and ever since then I've been a fan of
non-verbose systax - ie syntax that's the *opposite* of Java
On 07/19/2012 09:35 PM, Damian wrote:
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 22:32:04 UTC, David Piepgrass wrote:
Actually, C# has no default initialization* of local variables, and I
love it. Instead, it is a compile-time error to read a variable if the
compiler cannot guarantee that you have
On 2012-07-20 00:05, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
No, this is why any C/C++ project should be replaced by D ;)
I'm knee-deep in a C++ project right now, and the language is such a
pedantic, anachronistic turd. C++'s *only* saving graces are:
- It's a systems language (ie, native compiled with
On 2012-07-20 00:32, David Piepgrass wrote:
Actually, C# has no default initialization* of local variables, and I
love it. Instead, it is a compile-time error to read a variable if the
compiler cannot guarantee that you have initialized it. IMO this is much
better than D's let's initialize
Jacob Carlborg wrote in message news:juaudk$2slh$1...@digitalmars.com...
On 2012-07-20 00:05, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
No, this is why any C/C++ project should be replaced by D ;)
I'm knee-deep in a C++ project right now, and the language is such a
pedantic, anachronistic turd. C++'s *only*
On Friday, 20 July 2012 at 06:40:18 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-07-20 00:32, David Piepgrass wrote:
Actually, C# has no default initialization* of local
variables, and I
love it. Instead, it is a compile-time error to read a
variable if the
compiler cannot guarantee that you have
Am Thu, 19 Jul 2012 22:43:17 +0200
schrieb Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com:
On 2012-07-19 16:50, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
In C++ it's even better (irony). It depends on what kind of variable is
declared. I.e. a global variable, a local, instance or a class variable
(static). Some of these
On 2012-07-20 16:33, Marco Leise wrote:
I think C++ uses a pragmatic approach: No overhead for explicit initialization.
But everything that goes into the executable and doesn't have a specific value,
will go into the BSS section, where it A) takes up no space and B) the OS will
take care of
On Friday, 20 July 2012 at 08:17:03 UTC, renoX wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2012 at 06:40:18 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-07-20 00:32, David Piepgrass wrote:
Actually, C# has no default initialization* of local
variables, and I love it. Instead, it is a compile-time error
to read a
Hi,
I'm an occasional lurker on the D forums just to see where the
language is going,but I'm a little puzzled. In another thread I
found this code
auto r = [5, 3, 5, 6, 8].sort.uniq.map!(x = x.to!string);
I don't understand whats going on here. Int array is getting
sorted, then Uniqued,
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:21:47 UTC, Petr Janda wrote:
Hi,
I'm an occasional lurker on the D forums just to see where the
language is going,but I'm a little puzzled. In another thread I
found this code
auto r = [5, 3, 5, 6, 8].sort.uniq.map!(x = x.to!string);
I don't understand whats
Am 19.07.2012 16:21, schrieb Petr Janda:
Hi,
I'm an occasional lurker on the D forums just to see where the language
is going,but I'm a little puzzled. In another thread I found this code
auto r = [5, 3, 5, 6, 8].sort.uniq.map!(x = x.to!string);
I don't understand whats going on here. Int
btw - as for your complains - I would blame poor D documentation
more than the feature itself; as for what type is x, it's
inferred from the prototype of the called function; type
inference is a standard feature in many static languages.
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:21:47 UTC, Petr Janda wrote:
Hi,
Hi
I'm an occasional lurker on the D forums just to see where the
language is going,but I'm a little puzzled. In another thread I
found this code
auto r = [5, 3, 5, 6, 8].sort.uniq.map!(x = x.to!string);
Here's list what
q66 , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172716), a écrit :
(so instead of calling a(b(c(d(e(f) you can just call
a.b.c.d.e.f())
rather f.e.d.c.b.a, if you omit the empty parenthesis after each letter
(but f).
On 19-07-2012 16:31, Petr Janda wrote:
Array gets sorted, then doubles are removed (uniq) and then everything
is converted to a string (map).
Everything was recently introduced around 2.059.
Ok, but what is map!(). What's the point of the exclamation mark, is it
a template specialization?
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:31:41 UTC, Petr Janda wrote:
Array gets sorted, then doubles are removed (uniq) and then
everything is converted to a string (map).
Everything was recently introduced around 2.059.
Ok, but what is map!(). What's the point of the exclamation
mark, is it a
Array gets sorted, then doubles are removed (uniq) and then
everything is converted to a string (map).
Everything was recently introduced around 2.059.
Ok, but what is map!(). What's the point of the exclamation mark,
is it a template specialization?
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:33:49 UTC, q66 wrote:
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:31:41 UTC, Petr Janda wrote:
Array gets sorted, then doubles are removed (uniq) and then
everything is converted to a string (map).
Everything was recently introduced around 2.059.
Ok, but what is map!().
Am 19.07.2012 16:31, schrieb Petr Janda:
Array gets sorted, then doubles are removed (uniq) and then everything
is converted to a string (map).
Everything was recently introduced around 2.059.
Ok, but what is map!(). What's the point of the exclamation mark, is it
a template specialization?
Petr Janda , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172719), a écrit :
Array gets sorted, then doubles are removed (uniq) and then
everything is converted to a string (map).
Everything was recently introduced around 2.059.
Ok, but what is map!(). What's the point of the exclamation mark,
is it a
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:31:53 UTC,
trav...@phare.normalesup.org (Christophe Travert) wrote:
q66 , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172716), a écrit :
(so instead of calling a(b(c(d(e(f) you can just call
a.b.c.d.e.f())
rather f.e.d.c.b.a, if you omit the empty parenthesis after
Robik , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172718), a écrit :
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:21:47 UTC, Petr Janda wrote:
Hi,
Hi
I'm an occasional lurker on the D forums just to see where the
language is going,but I'm a little puzzled. In another thread I
found this code
auto r = [5, 3,
On 19-07-2012 16:36, Christophe Travert wrote:
Petr Janda , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172719), a écrit :
Array gets sorted, then doubles are removed (uniq) and then
everything is converted to a string (map).
Everything was recently introduced around 2.059.
Ok, but what is map!(). What's
Petr Janda , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172727), a écrit :
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:31:53 UTC,
trav...@phare.normalesup.org (Christophe Travert) wrote:
q66 , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172716), a écrit :
(so instead of calling a(b(c(d(e(f) you can just call
a.b.c.d.e.f())
Alex Rønne Petersen , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172728), a écrit :
On 19-07-2012 16:36, Christophe Travert wrote:
Petr Janda , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172719), a écrit :
Array gets sorted, then doubles are removed (uniq) and then
everything is converted to a string (map).
On 19-07-2012 16:21, Petr Janda wrote:
Hi,
I'm an occasional lurker on the D forums just to see where the language
is going,but I'm a little puzzled. In another thread I found this code
auto r = [5, 3, 5, 6, 8].sort.uniq.map!(x = x.to!string);
I don't understand whats going on here. Int array
On 07/19/2012 04:21 PM, Petr Janda wrote:
Hi,
I'm an occasional lurker on the D forums just to see where the language
is going,but I'm a little puzzled. In another thread I found this code
auto r = [5, 3, 5, 6, 8].sort.uniq.map!(x = x.to!string);
I don't understand whats going on here. Int
No, please, template instantiation. Specialization is something
completely different, and doesn't happen at the call site.
Sorry, my fault. I'm a non-native english speaker.
What I meant is calling functionstring(args)
I think it's called instantiation.
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should
look
like what it does.
Not if eliminating noise equals to making things harder to
understand.
When you say (int x) { return x; } it's clear about what it is, a
_function_ without name.
On 07/19/2012 05:03 PM, Petr Janda wrote:
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.
Not if eliminating noise equals to making things harder to understand.
Harder to understand to whom? Optimizing stuff for beginners usually
makes it a PITA to
On 07/19/2012 04:39 PM, Petr Janda wrote:
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:31:53 UTC, trav...@phare.normalesup.org
(Christophe Travert) wrote:
q66 , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172716), a écrit :
(so instead of calling a(b(c(d(e(f) you can just call a.b.c.d.e.f())
rather f.e.d.c.b.a,
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Petr Janda janda.p...@gmail.com wrote:
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.
Not if eliminating noise equals to making things harder to understand.
When you say (int x) { return x; } it's clear about what it
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Brad Anderson e...@gnuk.net wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Petr Janda janda.p...@gmail.com wrote:
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.
Not if eliminating noise equals to making things harder to
On 07/19/2012 05:20 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Petr Janda janda.p...@gmail.com
mailto:janda.p...@gmail.com wrote:
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.
Not if eliminating noise equals to
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:51:59 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On another note, (copied from wikipedia)
foreach(item; set) {
// do something to item
}
what's with the lax syntax being allowed?
s/lax/to the point/
Shouldn't it be at least specified auto item?
Why on earth would that be the
On 07/19/2012 08:03 AM, Petr Janda wrote:
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.
Not if eliminating noise equals to making things harder to understand.
When you say (int x) { return x; } it's clear about what it is, a
_function_ without
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:44:20 + (UTC)
trav...@phare.normalesup.org (Christophe Travert) wrote:
Petr Janda , dans le message (digitalmars.D:172727), a écrit :
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 14:31:53 UTC,
trav...@phare.normalesup.org (Christophe Travert) wrote:
q66 , dans le message
On 2012-07-19 16:39, Petr Janda wrote:
It's another thing I hate about Ruby is that a parenthesis enforcement
is weak.
I love that :)
--
/Jacob Carlborg
Am 19.07.2012 22:43, schrieb Jacob Carlborg:
On 2012-07-19 16:50, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
I suspect that you have a C++ background. If this is not accurate,
ignore the rest. But if it is accurate, my plea to you is: Learn other
languages. C++ has next to no innovative language features
On 2012-07-19 16:50, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
I suspect that you have a C++ background. If this is not accurate,
ignore the rest. But if it is accurate, my plea to you is: Learn other
languages. C++ has next to no innovative language features (even C++11's
take on lambdas is an abomination)
On 2012-07-19 17:03, Petr Janda wrote:
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.
Not if eliminating noise equals to making things harder to understand.
When you say (int x) { return x; } it's clear about what it is, a
_function_ without name.
What the _fuck_ guys? How did you get this many posts on what is
essentially this looks weird and I can't be fucked reading the
documentation?.
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 22:45:10 +0200
Paulo Pinto pj...@progtools.org wrote:
Am 19.07.2012 22:43, schrieb Jacob Carlborg:
On 2012-07-19 16:50, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
I suspect that you have a C++ background. If this is not accurate,
ignore the rest. But if it is accurate, my plea to you
I suspect that you have a C++ background. If this is not
accurate, ignore the rest. But if it is accurate, my plea to
you is: Learn other languages. C++ has next to no innovative
language features (even C++11's take on lambdas is an
abomination) and encourages defensive programming to the
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:32:03 +0200
David Piepgrass qwertie...@gmail.com wrote:
I suspect that you have a C++ background. If this is not
accurate, ignore the rest. But if it is accurate, my plea to
you is: Learn other languages. C++ has next to no innovative
language features (even
On 20/07/2012 00:49, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:32:03 +0200
David Piepgrass qwertie...@gmail.com wrote:
I suspect that you have a C++ background. If this is not
accurate, ignore the rest. But if it is accurate, my plea to
you is: Learn other languages. C++ has next to no
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 at 22:32:04 UTC, David Piepgrass wrote:
I suspect that you have a C++ background. If this is not
accurate, ignore the rest. But if it is accurate, my plea to
you is: Learn other languages. C++ has next to no innovative
language features (even C++11's take on lambdas
On 07/19/2012 10:21 AM, Petr Janda wrote:
...
I think the other points have been adequately covered.
...
auto r = [5, 3, 5, 6, 8].sort.uniq.map!(x = x.to!string);
...
I'm sorry I don't mean to be a criticizer, but it seems to me that D is
trying to be a dynamic-like compiled language way too
96 matches
Mail list logo
