Re: pure D JPEG decoder, with progressive JPEG support, public domain

2016-06-18 Thread Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Saturday, 18 June 2016 at 19:52:20 UTC, Observer wrote: in the context of image decoding, you're often handling untrusted data from external sources Not always though. The main case I'd use a little single-file thing is for files that I created and packaged with the application myself,

Re: Button: A fast, correct, and elegantly simple build system.

2016-06-18 Thread H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 08:46:30PM +, Jason White via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Saturday, 18 June 2016 at 14:23:39 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > > Moral of the story is, if you're writing a compiler, for the sake > > > of build systems everywhere, make the output deterministic! For > >

Re: Button: A fast, correct, and elegantly simple build system.

2016-06-18 Thread Jason White via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Saturday, 18 June 2016 at 14:23:39 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: Moral of the story is, if you're writing a compiler, for the sake of build systems everywhere, make the output deterministic! For consecutive invocations, without changing any source code, I want the hashes of the binaries to be

Re: pure D JPEG decoder, with progressive JPEG support, public domain

2016-06-18 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Saturday, 18 June 2016 at 19:52:20 UTC, Observer wrote: Not convinced? no. i believe that it's all strongly overrated. don't run software with full access to your system, don't feed it with untrusted data, use sandboxes and such, etc. this is the way to go, not adding endless checks for

Re: pure D JPEG decoder, with progressive JPEG support, public domain

2016-06-18 Thread Observer via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 17 June 2016 at 14:20:14 UTC, ketmar wrote: ah, i also put `.ptr` to array access to skip bounds checking -- i love to build my code with bounds checking on, and i don't feel that i need it in this decoder -- it should be fairly well-tested. This statement stands out as a problem.

Re: Button: A fast, correct, and elegantly simple build system.

2016-06-18 Thread H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 08:38:21AM +, Jason White via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Friday, 17 June 2016 at 20:36:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > - Assuming that a revision control system is in place, and a > > workspace is checked out on revision X with no further > > modifications,

Re: July D Boston Meetup gathering

2016-06-18 Thread Sameer Pradhan via Digitalmars-d-announce
Same here... -- Sameer On Tuesday, 14 June 2016 at 18:09:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Just announced. If you are in the area, come join us! http://www.meetup.com/Boston-area-D-Programming-Language-Meetup/events/231887464/ -Steve Can't wait! -- Andrei

Re: Button: A fast, correct, and elegantly simple build system.

2016-06-18 Thread Jason White via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 17 June 2016 at 20:36:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: - Assuming that a revision control system is in place, and a workspace is checked out on revision X with no further modifications, then invoking the build tool should ALWAYS, without any exceptions, produce exactly the same

Re: Button: A fast, correct, and elegantly simple build system.

2016-06-18 Thread Jason White via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 17 June 2016 at 10:24:16 UTC, Dicebot wrote: However, I question the utility of even doing this in the first place. You miss out on the convenience of using the existing command line interface. And for what? Just so everything can be in D? Writing the same thing in Lua would be

Re: Button: A fast, correct, and elegantly simple build system.

2016-06-18 Thread Jason White via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 17 June 2016 at 20:59:46 UTC, jmh530 wrote: I found the beginning of the tutorial very clear. I really liked that it can produce a png of the build graph. I also liked the Lua build description for DMD. Much more legible than the make file. However, once I got to the "Going Meta: