I'd like a higher max size limit for static arrays:
uint[10_000_000] arr;
For the LDC compiler is a fully arbitrary limit, it can support higher values.
I'd like ldc to be free to use a higher limit.
Most/all PC CPUs & operating systems are probably going to become 64 bit, but
in D int values a
"bearophile" wrote in message
news:he3hk8$6k...@digitalmars.com...
> I'd like a higher max size limit for static arrays:
> uint[10_000_000] arr;
> For the LDC compiler is a fully arbitrary limit, it can support higher
> values. I'd like ldc to be free to use a higher limit.
>
>
> Most/all PC CPU
Nick Sabalausky:
> Isn't that more or less what "size_t" is for?
Do you use size_t and ptrdiff_t often in your D programs?
Bye,
bearophile
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:55:35 +0300, bearophile
wrote:
Nick Sabalausky:
Isn't that more or less what "size_t" is for?
Do you use size_t and ptrdiff_t often in your D programs?
Bye,
bearophile
I do, very often (especially size_t). What's wrong with it?
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:36 PM, bearophile wrote:
> I'd like a higher max size limit for static arrays:
> uint[10_000_000] arr;
> For the LDC compiler is a fully arbitrary limit, it can support higher
> values. I'd like ldc to be free to use a higher limit.
>
>
> Most/all PC CPUs & operating sys
bearophile wrote:
I'd like a higher max size limit for static arrays:
uint[10_000_000] arr;
Why?
Don:
> Why?
There are C programs that use larghish static 2D arrays that can't be converted
to D1 for LDC as is, because of an arbitrary imposed limit. I'd like the D
specs to state that such limit is implementation-specific, can be different
between different compilers (but if you want you can
"Denis Koroskin" <2kor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:op.u3nd5txbo7c...@dkoroskin.saber3d.local...
> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:55:35 +0300, bearophile
> wrote:
>
>> Nick Sabalausky:
>>> Isn't that more or less what "size_t" is for?
>>
>> Do you use size_t and ptrdiff_t often in your D programs
bearophile wrote:
Most/all PC CPUs & operating systems are probably going to become 64
bit, but in D int values are 32 bit, so some years from now, when
everything is 64 bit D programs will probably keep containing:
int i; Unless D programmers will train themselves to nearly never use
int and
