Tim M Wrote:
> Congrats. Is anyone working on any idividual packages like ubuntu/gentoo?
You can find ebuilds for ldc trunk here:
http://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/d-overlay
Sorry I have an exam in two days so v0.9 ebuild won't be available for a while.
Congrats. Is anyone working on any idividual packages like ubuntu/gentoo?
== Quote from Christian Kamm (kamm-incasoftw...@removethis.de)'s article
> The first version of LDC (http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc), the LLVM
> based compiler for version one of the D programming language has been
> released for x86-32 Linux. Get it here:
> http://www.incasoftware.de/~kamm/ld
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 8:21 AM, Christian Kamm
wrote:
> The first version of LDC (http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc), the LLVM
> based compiler for version one of the D programming language has been
> released for x86-32 Linux. Get it here:
> http://www.incasoftware.de/~kamm/ldc/ldc-0.9.tbz2
C
== Quote from Christian Kamm (kamm-incasoftw...@removethis.de)'s article
> The first version of LDC (http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc), the LLVM
> based compiler for version one of the D programming language has been
> released for x86-32 Linux. Get it here:
> http://www.incasoftware.de/~kamm/ld
Christian Kamm wrote:
The first version of LDC (http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc), the LLVM
based compiler for version one of the D programming language has been
released for x86-32 Linux. Get it here:
http://www.incasoftware.de/~kamm/ldc/ldc-0.9.tbz2
This is great news, congratulations to t
dsimcha Wrote:
> == Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
> > The idea is very simple: just use D's native append operation, but cache
> > the capacity to avoid too many lookups (I understand that that's the
> > bottleneck).
> > I paste the code below, I'd be in
On Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:21:15 +0100, Christian Kamm wrote:
> The first version of LDC (http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc), the LLVM
> based compiler for version one of the D programming language has been
> released for x86-32 Linux. Get it here:
> http://www.incasoftware.de/~kamm/ldc/ldc-0.9.tbz2
The first version of LDC (http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc), the LLVM
based compiler for version one of the D programming language has been
released for x86-32 Linux. Get it here:
http://www.incasoftware.de/~kamm/ldc/ldc-0.9.tbz2
We had already announced this release during the Tango conference
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:29 AM, Nicolas wrote:
> Bill Baxter Wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:36 PM, bearophile wrote:
>> > Brad Roberts:
>> >
>> >> Restating in the form of a question... When would you _ever_ want {...}
>> >> to not form a scope?
>> >
>> > Recently I have shown a possible synt
Bill Baxter Wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:36 PM, bearophile wrote:
> > Brad Roberts:
> >
> >> Restating in the form of a question... When would you _ever_ want {...}
> >> to not form a scope?
> >
> > Recently I have shown a possible syntax for express general unsafeties in D
> > code, for exa
dsimcha:
> One definite problem that I've just realized is that there's no putNext(T[]).
> What if you need to append another array to your ArrayAppender, not just a
> single
> element?
Just add a simple method overload for that purpose, it's easy enough to do.
(the ArrayBuilder of my dlibs has t
Bill Baxter:
> To me it's hard to see those variable declarations as being anything
> other than scoped to the blocks they're in.
> So all I'm saying is if we could have some different delimiters for
> non-scope blocks then it might be nice, and make it easier to see when
> scopes are ending and wh
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
> Benji Smith wrote:
> > bearophile wrote:
> >> 5) The source code of the current algorithm module of D2 is already
> >> very complex to follow, it smells of over-generalization here and
> >> there. Sometimes it's better to
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:36 PM, bearophile wrote:
> Brad Roberts:
>
>> Restating in the form of a question... When would you _ever_ want {...}
>> to not form a scope?
>
> Recently I have shown a possible syntax for express general unsafeties in D
> code, for example:
>
> unsafe (bounds, overflow)
Brad Roberts:
> Restating in the form of a question... When would you _ever_ want {...}
> to not form a scope?
Recently I have shown a possible syntax for express general unsafeties in D
code, for example:
unsafe (bounds, overflow) {
... // here there's no array bound checks, not integral ove
16 matches
Mail list logo
