On 2012-03-15 23:59, foobar wrote:
On Thursday, 15 March 2012 at 10:39:04 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Why would that pose a problem to DMD? object.d is a regular D module and
D provides a public import feature. If that fails for some modules it
should be considered a bug in the compiler.
On Wednesday, 14 March 2012 at 23:14:42 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Alright, I've finished the basic functionality of my AA
implementation.
I still haven't solved that problem with using suffixless string
literals to index X[dstring], so you'll have to write
aa[abcd] instead
of just aa[abc]. But I
On 2012-03-15 08:59, foobar wrote:
On Wednesday, 14 March 2012 at 23:14:42 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Alright, I've finished the basic functionality of my AA implementation.
I still haven't solved that problem with using suffixless string
literals to index X[dstring], so you'll have to write
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 06:19:33 -0400, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com wrote:
On 2012-03-15 08:59, foobar wrote:
On Wednesday, 14 March 2012 at 23:14:42 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Alright, I've finished the basic functionality of my AA implementation.
I still haven't solved that problem with using
On 2012-03-15 11:39, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 06:19:33 -0400, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com wrote:
I think object.d should be empty except for the definition of Object.
The rest should be located in their own modules and publicly imported
in object.d
I think the compiler
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 06:47:00 -0400, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com wrote:
On 2012-03-15 11:39, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 06:19:33 -0400, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com wrote:
I think object.d should be empty except for the definition of Object.
The rest should be located in
On 2012-03-15 11:52, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Isn't full name of TypeInfo object.TypeInfo? Is that not hard-coded into
the compiler?
-Steve
I have no idea if object.TypeInfo is hard-coded into the compiler.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 15/03/12 00:16, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:30:45PM -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 3/13/12 7:54 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Hi all,
My AA implementation is slowly inching closer to being ready to
replace aaA.d.
Great! This will need compiler restructuring, and in fact
On 3/15/12 11:02 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
This is good, and very, very important. Do *not* make any attempt at
compiler integration until it is *completely* ready.
This includes AA literals. They need to be accepted somehow. The
compiler will give you syntax sugar and *nothing* more.
One
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:05:46 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 3/15/12 11:02 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
This is good, and very, very important. Do *not* make any attempt at
compiler integration until it is *completely* ready.
This includes AA literals. They
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:02:06PM +0100, Don Clugston wrote:
On 15/03/12 00:16, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
This is good, and very, very important. Do *not* make any attempt at
compiler integration until it is *completely* ready.
This includes AA literals. They need to be accepted somehow. The
On 3/15/12 12:12 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:05:46 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 3/15/12 11:02 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
This is good, and very, very important. Do *not* make any attempt at
compiler integration until it is
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:24:24 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 3/15/12 12:12 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:05:46 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 3/15/12 11:02 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
This is good,
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:39:19 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:24:24 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
What would that look like?
auto aa = [1:1];
becomes:
int[1] __k = [1]; // obviously, no heap allocation
On 3/15/12 12:39 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:24:24 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Template function takes over, does whatever is necessary, such as
possibly conversion to varargs.
Right, but with a template:
[1:1]
[1:1, 2:2]
become
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:22:06AM -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
This is one major area that I forgot to mention, and that is, making AA
literals work at compile-time. Currently things like this don't work:
enum myAA = [abc:123, def:456];
I'd like to make that work. That would
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:11:11 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 3/15/12 12:39 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:24:24 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Template function takes over, does whatever is
On 15.03.2012 21:22, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:02:06PM +0100, Don Clugston wrote:
On 15/03/12 00:16, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
This is good, and very, very important. Do *not* make any attempt at
compiler integration until it is *completely* ready.
This includes AA literals.
On Thursday, 15 March 2012 at 10:39:04 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 06:19:33 -0400, Jacob Carlborg
I think object.d should be empty except for the definition of
Object. The rest should be located in their own modules and
publicly imported in object.d
I think the
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:50:47PM +0400, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
[...]
This is one major area that I forgot to mention, and that is, making
AA literals work at compile-time. Currently things like this don't
work:
enum myAA = [abc:123, def:456];
I'd like to make that work. That would
On 3/15/12 5:59 PM, foobar wrote:
It frustrates me to no end Andrei's refusal to accept a design proven to
work for half a century (which is already utilized by the compiler!) -
the File System. Choosing instead to duplicate organization features
inside DDOC as sections. This is a classic
On Thursday, March 15, 2012 21:10:43 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 3/15/12 5:59 PM, foobar wrote:
It frustrates me to no end Andrei's refusal to accept a design proven to
work for half a century (which is already utilized by the compiler!) -
the File System. Choosing instead to duplicate
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:02:06PM +0100, Don Clugston wrote:
[...]
This is good, and very, very important. Do *not* make any attempt at
compiler integration until it is *completely* ready.
This includes AA literals. They need to be accepted somehow. The
compiler will give you syntax sugar
On 3/14/12 6:16 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
- Declaring an AA with non-const array keys will cause reams and reams
of compile errors. I'm not *too* worried about this at the moment
since it doesn't make sense to have non-const AA keys anyway. I'm also
seriously considering forcing *all* AA
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:58:01PM -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 3/14/12 6:16 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
- Declaring an AA with non-const array keys will cause reams and reams
of compile errors. I'm not *too* worried about this at the moment
since it doesn't make sense to have
25 matches
Mail list logo
