On Tuesday, 27 December 2016 at 04:36:54 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
This version resolves a number of regressions and bugs in the
2.072.1 release.
I thought https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/1707 was in
stable and slated for this point release.
I see at the bottom of:
On Saturday, 24 December 2016 at 06:08:49 UTC, Saurabh Das wrote:
Feedback:
1. It will be aesthetically better if the edit/run buttons are
inside the code box, say just inside the right top corner.
I agree the button placement should be improved, I think they
should be immediately to the
On Monday, 16 May 2016 at 12:13:14 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Last time people forced me to spend several hours on
reimplementing and debugging a BitArray implementation
Ouch.
src/tk/vec.(h|c) already contained an implementation.
Thanks!
On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 06:00:31 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
i believe that those rules are useless and senseless now, so
it's more like a one man crusade.
It's not a one man's crusade, it affects legibility and creates
dissonance within the text.
It also appears
On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 07:59:16 UTC, Gary Willoughby
wrote:
Stop being such a grammar nazi.
I didn't bring it up because I felt like being pedantic, I
brought it up as a suggestion to make it more pleasant to read.
Since you've already been labelled as a pedant, perhaps you
Just a correction:
On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 10:44:20 UTC, safety0ff wrote:
Since you've already been labelled as a pedant, perhaps you
should learn the difference between pedantry and Nazism.
I meant:
Since you've already labelled *me*
Anyways.
On Thursday, 28 August 2014 at 16:06:11 UTC, Gary Willoughby
wrote:
Direct link:
http://nomad.so/2014/08/hidden-treasure-in-the-d-standard-library/
What do you have against capitalizing 'I' ?
It's annoying / distracting to read text filled with
uncapitalised 'I's.
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 01:54:55 UTC, Paul D Anderson wrote:
Is this expected behavior that has never been enforced before,
or is it something new?
And is anyone else having the same problem?
Paul
Looks like a regression, I've filed it here:
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:18:46 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 23:14:45 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
I also propose to start 2.067 beta branch right now and
declare it yet another bug-fixing release.
Isn't this what point-releases are for, though?
I agree, I think
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 00:14:59 UTC, Andrew Edwards
wrote:
On 8/20/14, 8:38 AM, safety0ff wrote:
I agree, I think 2.066.next should be the focus considering
the known
issues of 2.066.
Fear not, point releases will address known deficiencies.
Btw, thank you for the good work
On Friday, 8 August 2014 at 12:01:43 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote:
DMD v2.066.0-rc2 binaries are available for testing:
http://wiki.dlang.org/Beta_Testing
Probably too late but
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3826 is an ICE
wrong-code fix which requires review (green
On Tuesday, 15 July 2014 at 22:40:02 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote:
Outstanding regressions impeding release are:
It would be nice if back-end issues got some attention prior to
releases.
For example:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9465
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11435
On Wednesday, 9 July 2014 at 16:00:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2a8xf4/dconf_2014_day_2_talk_4_reducing_d_bugs_by/
https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/881813965165619
https://news.ycombinator.com/newest (please find and vote
quickly)
On Thursday, 3 July 2014 at 23:17:33 UTC, Jonathan Crapuchettes
wrote:
Last time 24 issues were marked as resolved by the community
(including
EMSI).
Please join us in squashing bugs on #d.
Is this primarily bug tracker culling or does it include PR
reviewing, debugging, etc?
On Saturday, 28 June 2014 at 16:51:56 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
Am 28.06.2014 05:33, schrieb Peter Alexander:
On Saturday, 28 June 2014 at 02:46:25 UTC, safety0ff wrote:
On Saturday, 28 June 2014 at 02:02:28 UTC, Peter Alexander
int a;
const int b;
immutable int c;
foo(a);
foo(b);
foo(c);
I have two questions that I've come upon lately:
1) How was it decided that there should be implicit conversion
between signed and unsigned integers in arithmetic operations,
and why prefer unsigned numbers?
E.g. Signed / Unsigned = Unsigned
Is this simply compatibility with C or is there
On Saturday, 28 June 2014 at 02:02:28 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Friday, 27 June 2014 at 23:30:39 UTC, safety0ff wrote:
2) With regard to reducing template instantiations:
I've been using a technique similar to the one mentioned in
the video: separating functions out of templates to reduce
On Saturday, 28 June 2014 at 03:33:37 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
... I just tried this and I'm wrong. The qualifier isn't
stripped. Gah! Three different versions!
I could have sworn D did this for primitive types. This makes
me sad :-(
I guess you can make all kinds of code that depends
On Tuesday, 17 June 2014 at 22:09:06 UTC, Joakim wrote:
I don't mind it as much, because I'm not bingeing on the talks
and spreading out watching them instead, but it'd be nice to
see the talks I missed on the livestream and want to watch now,
rather than at some indeterminate date in the
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 04:21:18 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
1. http://he-the-great.livejournal.com/52333.html
Note that in the following code:
import core.memory : GC;
int* pxprime = cast(int*)GC.malloc(int.sizeof);
version(none) assert(pxprime); // possibly zero
GC.malloc
On Wednesday, 28 May 2014 at 13:05:53 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
Whats wrong with If you think that, you have another thing
coming.?
I've always understood it sort of like say your Father saying:
If you think that [i.e. you can steal your little brother's
ice cream cone], then you have
22 matches
Mail list logo
