In the meantime that Reddit thread is one of the worst I've seen on that
usually interesting site. Some C++ programmers seem to hate D a lot.
In my experience, convincing someone who have personally invested a lot in C++
is _hard_. People who care about big teams are not convinced at all by
Walter Bright, el 18 de agosto a las 12:25 me escribiste:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 18 de agosto a las 10:08 me escribiste:
bearophile wrote:
Currently in the D2 GC there is no notion of pinned/unpinned class
instances,
but eventually an attribute as @pinned may be added to
Walter Bright, el 18 de agosto a las 15:31 me escribiste:
bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
There is no need for a pin attribute, the gc can determine if a class needs
pinning or not.
The same is probably true for pure functions too, the compiler can determine
what functions are pure and
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
With the precise heap scanning patch for DMD the GC can automatically
pin memory, because it has enough information to differentiate between
real pointers and words which types are not really known, so a block can
be moved *only* if is only pointed to by real pointers,
Walter Bright, el 19 de agosto a las 13:08 me escribiste:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
With the precise heap scanning patch for DMD the GC can automatically
pin memory, because it has enough information to differentiate between
real pointers and words which types are not really known, so a block
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1622265
Andrei
On 08/18/2010 05:13 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1622265
Andrei
Now on reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/d2j8n/d_programming_language_interview_with_andrei/
Thanks davebrk!
Andrei
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:13:25 +0300, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1622265
Thanks, that was an interesting read.
It's possible that I'm missing something, but I think that C++'s default
constructors +
On 08/18/2010 06:46 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:13:25 +0300, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1622265
Thanks, that was an interesting read.
It's possible that I'm missing something, but I think
Andrei Alexandrescu:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/d2j8n/d_programming_language_interview_with_andrei/
I will need time to digest this interesting second part of your interview, you
say many complex things.
In the meantime that Reddit thread is one of the worst I've seen on that
bearophile wrote:
Currently in the D2 GC there is no notion of pinned/unpinned class instances,
but eventually an attribute as @pinned may be added to D3, plus its related
semantics. It adds complexity to the language and it needs to interact with
the GC, so it will get useful as the D GC
On 2010-08-18 06:13:25 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org said:
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1622265
Andrei
Quoting:
The most difficult scenario here is a class that has a struct as a
member. If the struct has a destructor, it will be run
On Wednesday, August 18, 2010 09:59:27 bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/d2j8n/d_programming_language
_interview_with_andrei/
I will need time to digest this interesting second part of your interview,
you say many complex things.
In the
Walter Bright, el 18 de agosto a las 10:08 me escribiste:
bearophile wrote:
Currently in the D2 GC there is no notion of pinned/unpinned class instances,
but eventually an attribute as @pinned may be added to D3, plus its related
semantics. It adds complexity to the language and it needs to
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 18 de agosto a las 10:08 me escribiste:
bearophile wrote:
Currently in the D2 GC there is no notion of pinned/unpinned class instances,
but eventually an attribute as @pinned may be added to D3, plus its related
semantics. It adds complexity to the
On 08/18/2010 11:59 AM, bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/d2j8n/d_programming_language_interview_with_andrei/
I will need time to digest this interesting second part of your
interview, you say many complex things.
In the meantime that
Walter Bright:
There is no need for a pin attribute, the gc can determine if a class needs
pinning or not.
The same is probably true for pure functions too, the compiler can determine
what functions are pure and what are not pure.
But the purpose of a @pinned is that:
1) The default becomes
bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
There is no need for a pin attribute, the gc can determine if a class needs
pinning or not.
The same is probably true for pure functions too, the compiler can determine
what functions are pure and what are not pure.
But the purpose of a @pinned is that: 1)
Walter Bright:
The other problem with a pinned/notpinned object is the object itself cannot
control who or how someone is pointing to it.
The type system may tell apart three kinds of pointers/references:
1) hand-managed pointers, to GC memory or C heap memory;
2) GC-managed pointers to pinned
bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
The other problem with a pinned/notpinned object is the object itself
cannot control who or how someone is pointing to it.
The type system may tell apart three kinds of pointers/references: 1)
hand-managed pointers, to GC memory or C heap memory; 2) GC-managed
Walter Bright:
Microsoft's managed C++ on .net comes with multiple pointer types - managed
and
unmanaged pointers - as far as I know, this was a technical success yet a
massive failure with users.
How do you define failure? Maybe for D2 multiple pointer types are a failure as
you say, but
bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
Microsoft's managed C++ on .net comes with multiple pointer types - managed
and unmanaged pointers - as far as I know, this was a technical success yet
a massive failure with users.
How do you define failure?
Nobody wanted to use it.
Maybe for D2 multiple
Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote in message
news:i4hvjh$91...@digitalmars.com...
Being forced to use something doesn't make that thing a success.
Unfortunately, I can think of a lot of counterexamples (any monopoly or
oligopoly, for instance). But I agree in spirit :)
23 matches
Mail list logo
