They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
Its is very crap thing i hope druntime will add soon gdc support. We can send
ldc and gdc patch.
Thanks for all
best regards
Hi,
If i understand druntime from github is main part of library, but for build
druntime with ldc by example ldc add specific part, maybe is same for gdc.
It will better to add these specific part to main druntime and do something
like:
make dc=dmd
make install
-- or --
make dc=ldc
make install
On 22/01/11 23:58, bioinfornatics wrote:
They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
Its is very crap thing i hope druntime will add soon gdc support. We can send
ldc and gdc patch.
Thanks for all
best regards
I've been talking to you o
Am 23.01.2011 01:32, schrieb Robert Clipsham:
On 22/01/11 23:58, bioinfornatics wrote:
They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
Its is very crap thing i hope druntime will add soon gdc support. We
can send ldc and gdc patch.
Thanks for all
On 1/22/2011 4:32 PM, Robert Clipsham wrote:
> On 22/01/11 23:58, bioinfornatics wrote:
>> They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
>> Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
>> Its is very crap thing i hope druntime will add soon gdc support. We can send
== Quote from Brad Roberts (bra...@puremagic.com)'s article
> On 1/22/2011 4:32 PM, Robert Clipsham wrote:
> > On 22/01/11 23:58, bioinfornatics wrote:
> >> They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
> >> Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
&g
On 1/23/2011 9:56 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> == Quote from Brad Roberts (bra...@puremagic.com)'s article
>> On 1/22/2011 4:32 PM, Robert Clipsham wrote:
>>> On 22/01/11 23:58, bioinfornatics wrote:
>>>> They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
>>&
On 2011-01-23 18:56, Iain Buclaw wrote:
== Quote from Brad Roberts (bra...@puremagic.com)'s article
On 1/22/2011 4:32 PM, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 22/01/11 23:58, bioinfornatics wrote:
They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
Its is
s wrote:
> >>>> They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
> >>>> Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
> >>>> Its is very crap thing i hope druntime will add soon gdc support. We can
> > send
> >>>> ldc and gdc patch.
&g
bioinfornatics Wrote:
> They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
> Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
Should it? Even if the devlopers of GDC and LDC2 were interested (and neither
have contacted me indicating this), I'm not sure it's an optimal workflow to
h
That would mean all D compiler writers maintain their runtime out of the same
repository, which is impractical.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:52 AM, bioinfornatics
wrote:
> Hi,
> If i understand druntime from github is main part of library, but for build
> druntime wi
@sean
if you install ldc2 like:
$ cmake . -DD_VERSION:STRING=2 -DCONF_INST_DIR:PATH=/etc
$ make -j4 VERBOSE=2
$ make -j4 install
and try install druntime from
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime.git
I can't because make file is only for dmd. What i try to said, yes we n
On 2011-07-08 10:42, bioinfornatics wrote:
> @sean
> if you install ldc2 like:
> $ cmake . -DD_VERSION:STRING=2 -DCONF_INST_DIR:PATH=/etc
> $ make -j4 VERBOSE=2
> $ make -j4 install
>
> and try install druntime from
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime.gi
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmx.com)'s article
> On 2011-07-08 10:42, bioinfornatics wrote:
> > @sean
> > if you install ldc2 like:
> > $ cmake . -DD_VERSION:STRING=2 -DCONF_INST_DIR:PATH=/etc
> > $ make -j4 VERBOSE=2
> > $ make -j4 install
c
> > > $ make -j4 VERBOSE=2
> > > $ make -j4 install
> > >
> > > and try install druntime from
> > > https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime.git I can't because
> > > make file is only for dmd. What i try to said, yes we need 1 dr
all ldc2 like:
> > > > $ cmake . -DD_VERSION:STRING=2 -DCONF_INST_DIR:PATH=/etc
> > > > $ make -j4 VERBOSE=2
> > > > $ make -j4 install
> > > >
> > > > and try install druntime from
> > > > https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d
> > if you install ldc2 like:
> > > > $ cmake . -DD_VERSION:STRING=2 -DCONF_INST_DIR:PATH=/etc
> > > > $ make -j4 VERBOSE=2
> > > > $ make -j4 install
> > > >
> > > > and try install druntime from
> > > > https://github.com/D-Pro
e:
$ cmake . -DD_VERSION:STRING=2 -DCONF_INST_DIR:PATH=/etc
$ make -j4 VERBOSE=2
$ make -j4 install
and try install druntime from
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime.git I can't because
make file is only for dmd. What i try to said, yes we need 1 druntime so
for this reason dru
be amenable to making druntime
more compatible in places.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 8, 2011, at 6:23 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> == Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmx.com)'s article
>>> On 2011-07-08 10:42, bioinfornatics
The latest git HEAD druntime has broken existing code:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12738
:-(
I'm no longer so sure it's a *regression*, strictly speaking, but it is
definitely a breakage that's going to cause users pain. I.e., it better
be in large bo
According to both the docs and my own experiments, thread_needLock() in
core.thread returns a bool that depends on whether the current process has
*ever* been multithreaded at *any* point in its execution. In Phobos's GC
(pre-druntime), a similar function existed, but it returned a bool bas
Hi,
What are the main differences between these two libs?
Since I saw:
On Github:
Druntime: Druntime is the minimum library required to support the
D programming
language. It includes the system code required to support the
garbage
collector, associative arrays, exception handling, array
I found the following bugs with the current implementations of getHash
in the various TypeInfo classes:
1) TypeInfo_Array.getHash doesn't work correctly with class objects.
with custom toHash() methods. Or, for that matter, arrays of AA's (which
have their own problems--see (3a)). It just does a h
I just tried building the latest (svn) version of druntime with the svn
version of dmd2, and got the compile errors:
src\core\dll_helper.d(372): Error: undefined identifier thread_detach
src\core\thread.d(1856): Error: undefined identifier obj
Is it broken, or am i doing something wrong
dding file into linking list,
however it is only x86 version and during building win64 linker
issues error due to model mismatch.
1) Why two trivial functions should be placed into separate .c
file compounding win64 buildings headache instead of placing it
somewhere in druntime among other D code
Blast from the past: found https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6309
while entering a very related enhancement request.
For now I assigned it to Martin as he's our release czar and by
extension also the build issues ombudsman. But I'm sure he wouldn't mind
if someone took this!
Andrei
Almost everything in druntime's core.sys.posix is currently ..not..
nothrow. This causes (me) to workaround by wrapping it with try/catch
statements which is completely unnecessary, it would be easier to just
copy those files in the project folder and change them unless they're
updated in the g
I noticed that I'm not able to unit test a file in isolation in
druntime like I can in phobos. For example, I can't seem to run
unit tests using the below method:
rdmd -unittest -main src/core/atomic.d
Is there a way to test modules in druntime like this?
Hi,
What are the reasoning behind core.sync.* primitives being
classes and not structs? This prevents them from being placing on
shared memory.
dsimcha wrote:
According to both the docs and my own experiments, thread_needLock() in
core.thread returns a bool that depends on whether the current process has
*ever* been multithreaded at *any* point in its execution. In Phobos's GC
(pre-druntime), a similar function existed, but it ret
7;s GC
(pre-druntime), a similar function existed, but it returned a bool based on
whether more than 1 thread was *currently* running. It seems to me that
omitting locks should be safe if no more than 1 thread is currently running,
even if more than 1 was running at some point in the past. Why is
n. In Phobos's GC
(pre-druntime), a similar function existed, but it returned a bool based on
whether more than 1 thread was *currently* running. It seems to me that
omitting locks should be safe if no more than 1 thread is currently running,
even if more than 1 was running at some point in the
the current process has
*ever* been multithreaded at *any* point in its execution. In Phobos's GC
(pre-druntime), a similar function existed, but it returned a bool based on
whether more than 1 thread was *currently* running. It seems to me that
omitting locks should be safe if no more than 1 th
in its execution. In Phobos's GC
> >(pre-druntime), a similar function existed, but it returned a bool based on
> >whether more than 1 thread was *currently* running. It seems to me that
> >omitting locks should be safe if no more than 1 thread is currently running,
> >ev
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
So yes one could probably switch back to the old Phobos style.
I would guess that it is not really a common situation for a program to
become single threaded again, though...
Fawzi
At work, we have a single-threaded application -- everything happens on
the GUI thread.
Christopher Wright, el 6 de diciembre a las 09:06 me escribiste:
> Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
> >So yes one could probably switch back to the old Phobos style.
> >I would guess that it is not really a common situation for a program to
> >become single threaded again, though...
> >Fawzi
>
> At work, we
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
a memory barrier would be needed, and atomic decrements, but I see that
it is not portable...
It would also somewhat defeat the purpose of thread_needLock, since IMO
this routine should be fast. If memory barriers are involved then it
may as well simply use a mutex its
On 2008-12-06 17:13:34 +0100, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
a memory barrier would be needed, and atomic decrements, but I see that
it is not portable...
It would also somewhat defeat the purpose of thread_needLock, since IMO
this routine should be fast. If mem
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
On 2008-12-06 17:13:34 +0100, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
a memory barrier would be needed, and atomic decrements, but I see
that it is not portable...
It would also somewhat defeat the purpose of thread_needLock, since
IMO this routine s
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Christopher Wright, el 6 de diciembre a las 09:06 me escribiste:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
So yes one could probably switch back to the old Phobos style.
I would guess that it is not really a common situation for a program to become
single threaded again, though...
Fawzi
A
On 2008-12-07 06:34:20 +0100, Robert Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Christopher Wright, el 6 de diciembre a las 09:06 me escribiste:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
So yes one could probably switch back to the old Phobos style.
I would guess that it is not really a common sit
On 2008-12-07 03:48:40 +0100, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
On 2008-12-06 17:13:34 +0100, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
a memory barrier would be needed, and atomic decrements, but I see that
it is not portable...
It would also some
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
On 2008-12-07 03:48:40 +0100, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Not true. You would need an acquire barrier in thread_needLock.
However, on x86 the point is probably moot since loads have acquire
semantics anyway.
You would need a very good processor to reorder spec
On 2008-12-07 09:23:01 +0100, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
On 2008-12-07 03:48:40 +0100, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Not true. You would need an acquire barrier in thread_needLock.
However, on x86 the point is probably moot since loads have acquire
sem
Reply to Robert,
Opening
Outlook takes 30 seconds.
The early (internal) versions of outlook took 5 MINUTES to open an e-mail.
The solution ended up including fewer threads IIRC, (but probably not single
threaded).
So I've come to the point where I have the WinAPI modules from
dsource.organd want to add them to druntime.
Here are the issues, that need to be discussed before I can send a pull
request:
1. There is a number of version flags that are expected to be specified to
the compiler, which spec
currently the class Throwable has a member toString which basically
generates the pretty stacktrace:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/blob/master/src/object_.d#L1337
Now, I tried to override that toString function to get my own
Exception-Body, but it just didn't ca
Don't worry about that. You will only be using Phobos2 with D2.
druntime was split out of Phobos, to provide the bare minimum (GC, arrays,
...) of D, so it was easier to use without Phobos or with a different
library like Tango. Both are currently used and actively developed.
drunti
On Thursday, February 02, 2012 02:33:39 Mattbeui wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What are the main differences between these two libs?
>
> Since I saw:
>
> On Github:
>
> Druntime: Druntime is the minimum library required to support the
> D programming
> language. It inc
On Feb 1, 2012, at 5:33 PM, Mattbeui wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What are the main differences between these two libs?
Druntime contains all the code that every D app needs to run. This includes
routines called by compiler-generated code, the garbage collector, and thread
support (needed so t
I chose myself to reply this topic, but I would like to say
thanks to:
Marco Leise, Jonathan M Davis and Sean Kelly for answering my
questions.
I really understood now.
Thanks again.
H. S. Teoh:
> I found the following bugs with the current implementations of getHash
> in the various TypeInfo classes:
Maybe there are other bugs you have not found yet.
In my opinion this is an important topic (some of the bugs listed here have
wasted lot of my time, and generally those limits
an important topic (some of the bugs listed here have
> wasted lot of my time, and generally those limits/bugs reduce the usefulness
> and safety of the built-in AAs significantly).
[...]
Walter fixed a bug in TypeInfo_Array.getHash yesterday, so now wstring
and dstring keys actually work pr
On 01.03.2012 1:45, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I found the following bugs with the current implementations of getHash
in the various TypeInfo classes:
1) TypeInfo_Array.getHash doesn't work correctly with class objects.
with custom toHash() methods. Or, for that matter, arrays of AA's (which
have their o
pute the hash of the hashes). Is there an easy way to
> >tell whether or not an array's elements are binary-hashable? If so,
> >we can still use hashing of the binary representation of the array
> >for the simple cases (dstring, wstring, array of structs without
> >nes
structs without
nested refs/objects), and save the slower code for more complicated
arrays.
std.traits hasIndirections?
This has to be fixed in druntime, though. Is there a druntime equivalent
to std.traits?
The fact that std.traits belongs to phobos doesn't mean it's imp
Hi all,
My AA implementation is slowly inching closer to being ready to replace
aaA.d. So far I've been writing the implementation outside of object_.d
for ease of testing & development; now I'm ready to start moving stuff
into object_.d to start working on integration with dr
Hi all-
I was testing some programs out with Valgrind, when I decided to try to
check a D program I had. I was a little surprised to discover that there
were a couple of issues detected - and more so to learn that all four of
them were in druntime. It's only 360 bytes total, but I feel li
Richard Webb wrote:
I just tried building the latest (svn) version of druntime with the svn
version of dmd2, and got the compile errors:
src\core\dll_helper.d(372): Error: undefined identifier thread_detach
src\core\thread.d(1856): Error: undefined identifier obj
Is it broken, or am i doing
One of the "issues" of druntime is that is that almost everything
in it is resolved at runtime. This is good because it avoids
bloat. However, it also means we run into 2 regular issues:
1. Performance (small issue). A lot of code that should be
otherwise fast is slower than i
dache instead of placing it
somewhere in druntime among other D code?
errno is typically implemented as a macro and often can't be
directly translated to D code.
2) How to avoid it? It comes to my mind to write two functions
in D, compile with -m64 -c, replace x86 version with x64
versi
I'm planning on doing a pull request for druntime which rewrites every
toString function within druntime to use the new sink signature. That
way druntime would cause a lot less allocations which end up beeing
garbage right away. Are there any objections against doing so? Any
reasons why s
Opinion from those in the know:
When extern(C) is used in druntime, my understanding is that the reason
is twofold:
1. Because the compiler requires certain symbols for hooks.
2. To get around some requirements that "druntime knows better", such as
purity for things like memory
And you aren't submitting a pull request with those changes because...
On 4/9/14, 8:47 PM, Etienne wrote:
Almost everything in druntime's core.sys.posix is currently ..not.. nothrow.
This causes (me) to
workaround by wrapping it with try/catch statements which is completely
unnecessary, it wou
On 2014-04-10 00:01, Brad Roberts wrote:
And you aren't submitting a pull request with those changes because...
Well, I was hoping for someone to catch on with the extern(C) = nothrow
idea. Maybe this reallyy belongs in DMD!
On 4/9/14, 9:49 PM, Etienne Cimon wrote:
On 2014-04-10 00:01, Brad Roberts wrote:
And you aren't submitting a pull request with those changes because...
Well, I was hoping for someone to catch on with the extern(C) = nothrow idea.
Maybe this reallyy
belongs in DMD!
It shouldn't, because it'
of the same. Just
> because most are no through
> doesn't imply they all are.
Well, the intention was good. If I may add: Don't pass a D
function that throws to C/C++ code on Linux/GNU x86_64.
DMD's stack unwinder relies on how the D compiler writes
stack frames. In partic
On 2014-04-10 2:51 AM, Marco Leise wrote:
> Isn't that paradox? Why is it legal to throw C++ exceptions
> into a language that can't possibly look at them? Does that
> mean every language which interfaces with C handles
> C++ exceptions in some way? E.g. JNI, Python, ...?
It's obviously blown ou
On 2014-04-10 1:19 AM, Brad Roberts wrote:
So, not gonna happen. Please do consider spending a little time to open
pull requests for the ones that it's safe to be specified as nothrow.
Someone has to and the more people investing little bits of their time
the better. Waiting for someone else to
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/839
Yes, I know others are interested in this, too!
On 3/30/15 4:37 PM, Jonathan wrote:
I noticed that I'm not able to unit test a file in isolation in druntime
like I can in phobos. For example, I can't seem to run unit tests using
the below method:
rdmd -unittest -main src/core/atomic.d
Is there a way to test modules in druntime
some symbols to be kept
if they are not referenced, and then unreferenced symbols are
removed, resulting in sometimes very small executables.
The problem is that if you don't KEEP some symbols for druntime,
or in your own program, you can run into errors because symbols
which weren&#x
On Thursday, 14 December 2017 at 07:04:49 UTC, Arun
Chandrasekaran wrote:
Hi,
What are the reasoning behind core.sync.* primitives being
classes and not structs? This prevents them from being placing
on shared memory.
s/placing/placed/
es that inherit those in druntime and
override their functionality, in vibe-d's case to make them
compatible with Fibers.
4) Class monitors currently work through the
object.Object.Monitor interface, which core.sync.mutex.Mutex
implements.
This prevents them from being placing on sha
On Thursday, 14 December 2017 at 08:00:44 UTC, Petar Kirov
[ZombineDev] wrote:
If you mean process shared memory, I agree that there are many
valid cases where you want to be in control of the memory. I
have been thinking about extracting the core of the
synchronization primitives into @system
Regarding ticket 14 in druntime:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/druntime/ticket/14
I've started looking at the best way to annotate all the pure/nothrow
functions in druntime. A lot of druntime functionality calls functions from
the C standard library or the Windows/POSIX API. I figur
scope pc = new PerformanceCounter;
pc.start;
uint[] foo;
foreach(i; 0..1_000_000) {
foo ~= i;
}
pc.stop;
writeln(pc.milliseconds);
}
Results:
DMD 2.019 (Last release before druntime): 42 milliseconds.
DMD 2.020 (First release with druntime): ~1000 milliseconds.
ne, TempAlloc can be anywhere
between 30% and 10s of times faster than the druntime GC allocator, depending
on several factors, the biggest being lock contention for the druntime
allocator.
TempAlloc's biggest weakness is that nothing allocated by TempAlloc is scanned
by the GC, making it impos
On Nov 24, 2012, at 11:13 PM, Gor Gyolchanyan
wrote:
> So I've come to the point where I have the WinAPI modules from dsource.org
> and want to add them to druntime.
>
> Here are the issues, that need to be discussed before I can send a pull
> request:
>
> 1. Th
and want to add them to druntime.
> >
> > Here are the issues, that need to be discussed before I can send a pull
> request:
> >
> > 1. There is a number of version flags that are expected to be specified
> to the compiler, which specifies the Windows version, Internet Exp
On Sunday, 25 November 2012 at 07:13:15 UTC, Gor Gyolchanyan
wrote:
So I've come to the point where I have the WinAPI modules from
dsource.organd want to add them to druntime.
Here are the issues, that need to be discussed before I can
send a pull
request:
1. There is a number of ve
On Sunday, November 25, 2012 10:38:36 Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> Copyright? Last I checked almost all files, except the WinSock
> ones, are explicitly specified to be in the public domain. Please
> clarify?
That's certainly what I remember. What's always confused me though is that
I've heard tha
On Sunday, 25 November 2012 at 12:28:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Sunday, November 25, 2012 10:38:36 Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
Copyright? Last I checked almost all files, except the WinSock
ones, are explicitly specified to be in the public domain.
Please
clarify?
That's certainly what
Am 21.10.2012 17:03, schrieb David:
currently the class Throwable has a member toString which basically
generates the pretty stacktrace:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/blob/master/src/object_.d#L1337
Now, I tried to override that toString function to get my own
Exception
I've always built my libs like that:
cd druntime
git pull -v
make MODEL=64 -f posix.mak -j2
make MODEL=32 -f posix.mak -j2
cd ../phobos
git pull -v
make MODEL=64 -f posix.mak -j2 && mv
generated/linux/release/64/libphobos2.a ../../linux/lib64
make MODEL=32 -f posix.mak -j2 &
The level of support for the Windows API in druntime and Phobos is pretty low.
As I understand it, Windows users are pretty much forced to use
http://www.dsource.org/projects/bindings/browser/trunk/win32 if they need
comprehensive Win32 API bindings. druntime seems to be trying to define all of
Welcome to Hell. =D
Some of the things you can do with AAs are recognized by the compiler during
semantic and turned into druntime calls, sometimes the constructs survive
all the way to the glue layer (e2ir) and are turned into druntime calls
there and sometimes the type of an expressions is
On 14 March 2012 14:37, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> Welcome to Hell. =D
Sounds fun.
(Seasoned DF player)
--
James Miller
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 offers the
perfect opportunity for it. I suggest you to post your implementation
here for review first, and a
ing stuff into object_.d to start working on
integration with druntime.
Hi,
If I'm understanding this correctly you are moving the entire
implementation of the AA into object.d and as such letting
programs be purview to its inner working? In sort meaning you
are making the entire AA implemen
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 offers the
> perfect opport
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:37:08PM +1100, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> Welcome to Hell. =D
Ahhhahahaha... sounds like I leapt into the deep end of the pool without
knowing it. :-P
> Some of the things you can do with AAs are recognized by the compiler
> during semantic and turned into drunt
ng it. :-P
>
>
Yeah, the AA implementation is the deepest part I've found in dmd.
>> Some of the things you can do with AAs are recognized by the compiler
>> during semantic and turned into druntime calls, sometimes the
>> constructs survive all the way to the glue lay
velopment; now I'm
ready to start moving stuff into object_.d to start working on
integration with druntime.
Hi,
If I'm understanding this correctly you are moving the entire
implementation of the AA into object.d and as such letting
programs be purview to its inner working? In sort mea
velopment; now I'm
ready to start moving stuff into object_.d to start working on
integration with druntime.
Hi,
If I'm understanding this correctly you are moving the entire
implementation of the AA into object.d and as such letting
programs be purview to its inner working? In sort mea
se of testing & development; now I'm
ready to start moving stuff into object_.d to start working on
integration with druntime.
Hi,
If I'm understanding this correctly you are moving the entire
implementation of the AA into object.d and as such letting
programs be purview to its inn
iting the implementation
outside of object_.d for ease of testing & development; now
I'm
ready to start moving stuff into object_.d to start working on
integration with druntime.
Hi,
If I'm understanding this correctly you are moving the entire
implementation of the AA into object.d
g the implementation
outside of object_.d for ease of testing & development; now
I'm
ready to start moving stuff into object_.d to start working on
integration with druntime.
Hi,
If I'm understanding this correctly you are moving the entire
implementation of the AA into object.d
far I've been writing the implementation
outside of object_.d for ease of testing & development; now
I'm
ready to start moving stuff into object_.d to start working on
integration with druntime.
Hi,
If I'm understanding this correctly you are moving the entire
implementa
es are
> populated by add and remove.
[...]
How is this different from any other templates in druntime/phobos?
And FYI, the current AA implementation *already* suffers from this
problem, because the Range interface already assumes a specific
implementation behind the opaque pImpl pointer (see ob
1 - 100 of 1253 matches
Mail list logo
