On Friday, 16 March 2018 at 07:58:33 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
Playing captain the obvious but this is COPY not slice.
Shh. Don't tell my customers that.
D had slices since 2000s, pointing to any kind of memory.
Mmm..D showing off.. as always ;-)
On Thursday, 15 March 2018 at 18:39:08 UTC, rumbu wrote:
My quote is out of context. Somebody asked surprised why C#
developers are interested in D. For me (mainly a C# developer),
this is the main reason: native compilation (and this includes
memory management). I highlighted the fact that the
On Monday, 12 March 2018 at 19:09:42 UTC, Dennis wrote:
On Monday, 12 March 2018 at 16:07:40 UTC, SealabJaster wrote:
This post may not be all that helpful, but I feel the need to
voice the frustrations with my experience. Sorry for the
pointless/off-topic rant.
Thank you for this post, I fou
On Monday, 12 March 2018 at 06:13:35 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I'm comparing two open source projects, both hosted on github.
Both available in the same supermarket. It seems that one of
them is easy to reach to, the other one is on the top shelf and
you need a forklift to reach it. And when you brin
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 16:15:22 UTC, rumbu wrote:
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 14:37:28 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
And this clarifies the source of your confusion. The D
programming language is an open source project, not a
for-profit company. D is not the language you're looking for.
There ar
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 13:36:27 UTC, R wrote:
I am sure that lots of D members will be quick to point out,
that C# is run by a commercial company and D has only open
source contributors. Now why did you not contribute! /sarcasm
I'd like to point out, that C# is run by a commercial com
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 07:59:53 UTC, rumbu wrote:
My opinion is that the day when C# will compile to native (on
any platform), the C# developer interest in D will drop
instantly.
OT:
Interestingly, my uni is still stuck in the OOP paradigm, and is
now teaching intro to OOP using .NET Co
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 05:41:02 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
I regret some of things I said. I'm sorry for any offence
caused, specifically towards members of the DLF.
I don't think you need to regret saying anything. You've
demonstrated a willingness to engage in a conversation that we
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:58:50 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
i.e. How can the D Foundation encourage new additional resoures
to focus on things that also matter to the community.
and btw. the mention about strengthing the use of DIPS, does just
that.
there are many improvement to 'p
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:53:30 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
That sentence was to counter psychoticRabbit. I didn't mean it
literally. If you've read my earlier posts, it's not BetterC I
have an issue with, it's the allocation of time.
Well that should have been the basis of your original
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:46:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Rust was more popular and who could use that?
Rust is popular because of its ideas, not because it pandered.
I don't see "programmer" portability as being pandering.
It common sense.
Rust is good, in that it seeks to do something
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:36:51 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
The D Language Foundation, being the leading body of D, should
hold some responsibility to the interests of the majority.
And also the minority. A lesson that humanity has to learn over
and over again.
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:25:07 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean at that last sentence.
I mean, cause D is so compatible with C/C++/Java/C# - that you
can easily switch between them.
Whereas as Go and Rust have their own thing going, making those
languages really di
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:06:08 UTC, R wrote:
And "scripting" language like PHP, that everybody
criticizes just keeps growing and gained 11% market share in
the last 7 years ( at now 83% ). Where as D its gain has been
minimalist thanks to people leaving almost as fast as it gain.
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:06:08 UTC, R wrote:
Point to the wall on the left side. That is what your talking
to. D its focus on C++ as a bad plan has been made pushed by
many people ( lots who left ). Its like asking Go for Generics.
And its very nice to see the "71% in the poll do not w
On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 00:36:19 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?
Oddly enough, I think this is D's strength.
Golang tried to draw the line, and look where that got it. Now
it's a limited language for a specific domain (at least unt
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:45:25 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I'm talking about the D Foundation priority list, not about the
open source community surrounding it. I have nothing against
betterC, the community is free to work on it, but I don't
understand why it's a *priority* for the D foundation.
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:45:25 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I'm talking about the D Foundation priority list, not about the
open source community surrounding it. I have nothing against
betterC, the community is free to work on it, but I don't
understand why it's a *priority* for the D foundation
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents
don't care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?
who cares what 'the majority' want... I mean really.
stuff em!
(ohh... that was in jest.. don't take that seriou
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:47:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it
can't even interface with itself through DLLs?
A reasonable point.
But.. in any case.. people work on what they are motivated to
work on.
That's really all there is t
On Friday, 9 March 2018 at 21:43:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Hello, the vision document of the Founation for the first six
months of 2018 is here:
nice.
andd that 'langauge specification' is really important too.. or
people will drift towards languages that 'are' properly specified.
On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 20:50:37 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
Also, if you'll allow me to have crazy ideas for a moment, one
wonders why we shouldn't just release Phobos itself through
dub? Rust makes people use their build tool, why not us?
That's the day I stop using D.
I do not, and wil
On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 07:11:24 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
That example actually should be perfectly @safe, because the
array is null, and it's using writeln. Dereferencing null is
@safe, because it segfaults and thus can't corrupt memory or
access invalid memory. You obviously don't w
On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 05:22:58 UTC, Void-995 wrote:
Can somebody explain how &array[0] is more safe than array.ptr?
Just want to understand why second statement isn't allowed in
safe anymore.
int[] a;
writeln(&arr[0]); // good - runtime produces a
core.exception.RangeError
//writeln(a
On Monday, 5 March 2018 at 23:40:35 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
I'd have a snowball's chance in hell convincing anyone at a
"regular" company of adopting D if anyone there even imagined
any of the above could happen.
We have to do better than this.
Atila
Fair enough. Doing better is always a
On Saturday, 3 March 2018 at 01:50:25 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Glad to announce D 2.079.0.
This release comes with experimental `@nogc` exception throwing
(-dip1008), a lazily initialized GC, better support for minimal
runtimes, and an experimental Windows toolchain based on the
lld linker an
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 12:20:31 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
And if you like C so much, what are you doing in a safe systems
programming language forum?
How safe is D.. i mean really ;-)
and why do people ask me that question.. I don't get it.
I program (or try to) in as many languages as my
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 13:05:58 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
Science, in and of itself, cannot be dodgy.
science must involve humans, and humans are often dodgy.
Yes there are debates to be had, cf. Popper, Kuhn, etc. but the
foundation of science is hypotheses, experimentation, and
repro
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 12:02:43 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 11:52 +, Russel Winder wrote:
[…]
report science, does make science dodgy. But that stray off
topic for
[…]
s/does/does not/
Obviously. :-)
mmm...freudian slip??
I study science...and what's being taug
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 11:00:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
In any case, I expect that anyone who wants D3 is going to have
a very hard time convincing Walter and Andrei that such large
breaking changes would be worth it at this point.
- Jonathan M Davis
I agree. I don't think there is
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 10:21:05 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
...continue with C in the face of overwhelming evidence
it is the wrong thing to do.
yeah, the health fanatics who promote their crap to goverments
and insurance agencies, use very similar arguments about sugar,
salt, alchohol, th
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 03:57:25 UTC, barry.harris wrote:
Sorry little rabbit, your are misguided in this belief. Back in
day we all used C and this is the reason most "safer" languages
exist today.
You can write pretty safe code in C these days, without too much
trouble. We have the too
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 02:35:46 UTC, Meta wrote:
D1 -> D2 nearly killed D (can't remember which, but it was
either Walter or Andrei that have said this on multiple
occasions). A D2 -> D3 transition might generate a lot of
publicity if done very carefully, but more than likely it would
ju
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 02:02:42 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
btw. I never said 'stop changing', I said "I wish programming
languages would just stop changing so often."
I'd also argue, that languages that are relatively stable, are
far 'safer' than languages that constantly change.
So
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 01:19:53 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Because it has not stopped changing. To wit:
K&R C (1978)
C89 / C90 / ANSI C (1989-1990)
The 1995 amendment to ANSI C (1995)
C99 (1999)
(Embedded C (2008))
C11 (2011)
T
btw. I never s
On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 00:53:02 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 12:39:08AM +, psychoticRabbit via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...]
On the otherhand, I wish programming languages would just stop
changing so often.
[...]
Change is inevitable, except from a vending
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 21:49:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
That being said, I think that it's a given that we need to make
breaking changes at least occasionally. The question is more
how big they can be and how we go about it. Some changes would
clearly be far too large to be worth i
On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 at 02:57:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
Saturday morning, a user complained that several leading dub
packages had poor documentation, if they could find it at all.
That's changing, right now.
Before long, packages without docs are going to suffer. This
will put pr
On Saturday, 24 February 2018 at 07:09:05 UTC, zabruk70 wrote:
i don't understand whole theread.
why all import must be written on one line?
curent syntax very handy and readable.
you must have understood the thread, cause you summarised it
pretty well ;-)
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 16:03:56 UTC, Aurélien Plazzotta
wrote:
Perhaps, we could use Backus-Naur notation, as it is already
widely known into formal documents all over the globe, like the
following:
import std.stdio, std.whatever{this, that}, std.somethingelse,
std.grr{wtf};
That
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 23:46:02 UTC, Norm wrote:
Well, D is already a compiled scripting language :)
technically (and otherwise) that is not correct...thank god!
lets keep it that way.
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 18:13:51 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 13:42:45 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 12:06:23 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
Absolutely. D scripting is the trojan horse that enables
introduction of it in hostile en
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 14:07:03 UTC, Andrea Fontana wrote:
It could be interesting if a D-team would win this :)
tl;dr:
Google gives a coding problem, you have to solve it. Any
programming language is accepted. You have to register your
team.
Details:
https://hashcode.withgoogle.com/
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 12:06:23 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
Absolutely. D scripting is the trojan horse that enables
introduction of it in hostile environment. Runnable compiled
source code is nice.
scripting languages is reinventing computer science.. only really
badly.
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 09:48:33 UTC, Norm wrote:
This import feature and surrounding discussion I couldn't care
less about ...
I actually spend far more time reading large chunks of code, than
writing code, and I certainly do NOT want to spend extra time
deciphering imports, due to
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 03:26:11 UTC, Seb wrote:
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 03:20:22 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
compared to the current change in beta.
FWIW the change is almost gone from the beta:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/7939
I'm glad common sense seems to be winning
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 02:31:34 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
We deprecate stuff when we need to, but every time we deprecate
something, it breaks code (even if it's not immediate
breakage), so the benefits that come from a deprecation need to
be worth the breakage that it causes. Every
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 02:31:34 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
We deprecate stuff when we need to, but every time we deprecate
something, it breaks code (even if it's not immediate
breakage), so the benefits that come from a deprecation need to
be worth the breakage that it causes. Ever
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 01:53:45 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 01:16:24 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
I can sympathize with wanting to avoid bikeshedding, but
almost no one who has posted thinks that this is a good idea.
This was meant for the discussion of a ne
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 01:17:26 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 01:02:59 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Interesting, you have a good example?
yeah..phobos.
I learn most about the various phobos libraries, and their
usefulness, from looking at the various import
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 01:02:59 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Interesting, you have a good example?
yeah..phobos.
I learn most about the various phobos libraries, and their
usefulness, from looking at the various imports that phobos
modules use.
If they just used import *; I'd have no
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 00:47:10 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 00:14:21 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 2/22/2018 1:56 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I'm a little disappointed that a change like this got in,
whereas
something that's actually helpful, like DIP 1009, is si
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 00:14:21 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/22/2018 1:56 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I'm a little disappointed that a change like this got in,
whereas
something that's actually helpful, like DIP 1009, is sitting
in limbo.
It's always true that trivia attracts far more att
On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 00:05:59 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Unfortunately it's a bit hard to find arguments in the
discussion below, would have been cool if there were a few well
argumented comments instead dozens of +1s.
Go back and read all of this thread, properly.
- this grammar
On Thursday, 22 February 2018 at 13:35:00 UTC, aliak wrote:
Given that comma is implemented already, and barring a revert,
can we maybe somewhat unbreak it by allowing:
import mod1: write, .mod2;
So leading dot to say it's a module (if not fully qualified)
leading dots?? grr!!
I doubt cha
On Thursday, 22 February 2018 at 10:42:46 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
I still believe it should be something more readable:
import std.stdio, std.conv : [ to, from ], std.algorithm :
doSomething, std.whatever;
yeah.. nice.. though we can make that even easier by dropping ":"
i.e.
import std.ra
On Thursday, 22 February 2018 at 08:42:12 UTC, psychoticRabbit
wrote:
import std.stdio:write,writeln,writefln &
std.array:join,split,replicate;
vs
import
std.stdio:write,writeln,writefln,std.array:join,split,replicate;
and the rule would be simple.
you can import modules on a single line
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 18:10:51 UTC, rjframe wrote:
But it likely shouldn't be used in "real" applications; in
particular, I think it would be nice for the Phobos style guide
to restrict/disallow its use.
grrr!
better we get some common sense when implementing new stuff ;-)
import
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 16:58:22 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 02:46:56PM +, psychoticRabbit via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...]
Syntax is EVERYTHING. It can make or break a language.
And semantics doesn't matter.
:-D
T
assert("easy o
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 15:33:02 UTC, Joakim wrote:
I thought about chiming in on that PR when it was open, but
didn't because the vote was split at 5-5 and I thought it
wouldn't get merged. Also, I'm not against the idea in
principle, but I do wish you'd chosen better syntax, such
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 10:15:48 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 10:04:01 Kagamin via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 February 2018 at 22:54:43 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> Yeah, personally I'd avoid writing it that way too.
There's no other way t
On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 at 09:50:31 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
If C++ isn't viewed as a competitor, why bother with repetitive
complaining about C++?
Because it doesn't get enough criticism ;-)
I believe the programming langauges of the future, and the ones
people should invest
On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 at 08:53:31 UTC, drug wrote:
14.02.2018 11:45, Ola Fosheim Grøstad пишет:
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 23:35:36 UTC, Seb wrote:
Someone revived the Expressive C++17 Coding Challenge thread
today and I thought this is an excellent opportunity to
revive my blog
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 23:35:36 UTC, Seb wrote:
Someone revived the Expressive C++17 Coding Challenge thread
today and I thought this is an excellent opportunity to revive
my blog and finally write an article showing why I like D so
much:
https://seb.wilzba.ch/b/2018/02/the-expressiv
On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 06:28:15 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
wrote:
Then pick assembly of sorts.
C ABI is a stright-jacket that ensures e.g. that your callstack
is laid out correctly so that a ‘ret’ will bring you back to
the call site not somewhere else. Do I need to mention libc’s
machinat
On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 07:10:42 UTC, Cym13 wrote:
As someone who's job is to audit banking and governmental
systems for security vulnerabilities, I can assure you it's a
real issue. Not the most common one, okay, but that doesn't
make it any less dangerous.
humans auditing the work
On Sunday, 11 February 2018 at 15:18:20 UTC, Cym13 wrote:
On the other hand, if my bank shoots itself in the foot it's
with my money... We must definitely have ways to do it but it
must be explicit and restricted to where it's useful. There is
no need for -boundscheck=off in D. It is always p
On Wednesday, 7 February 2018 at 20:30:54 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky
wrote:
Other languages like Rust or C# (or Java) have bounds check.
Plus we probably lose it in release mode, which is the mode
where lurking bugs are discovered usually days after
development ;) Some of these languages would preve
68 matches
Mail list logo
