if i encapsulate a part of statements within function with synchronized keyword
and then let says 1 thread is calling the function, then another thread try to
access it, will d put the later thread to wait (sleep) until the 1st call
finished it or it will signal failure to access? thanks
BCS wrote:
Hello Georg,
BCS wrote:
Does anyone have a good solution to installing both D1 and D2 on the
same system?
~$ cd /usr/local/digitalmars/
digitalmars$ ls -l
total 25216
drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 4096 2009-04-03 03:19 dmd1042
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7240365 2009-04-03 03:18 dmd.1
Hello Georg,
BCS wrote:
Does anyone have a good solution to installing both D1 and D2 on the
same system?
~$ cd /usr/local/digitalmars/
digitalmars$ ls -l
total 25216
drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 4096 2009-04-03 03:19 dmd1042
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7240365 2009-04-03 03:18 dmd.1.042.zip
drw
BCS wrote:
> Does anyone have a good solution to installing both D1 and D2 on the
> same system?
I have... (goes to check) 10 different compilers on my system. There's
\dmd\bin\dmd-default which is the only one on the PATH (and is basically
a stable version of Tango and DMD). If I want to use
BCS wrote:
Does anyone have a good solution to installing both D1 and D2 on the
same system?
~$ cd /usr/local/digitalmars/
digitalmars$ ls -l
total 25216
drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 4096 2009-04-03 03:19 dmd1042
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7240365 2009-04-03 03:18 dmd.1.042.zip
drwxr-xr-x 9 root
Hello Robert,
BCS wrote:
Does anyone have a good solution to installing both D1 and D2 on the
same system?
Possible solutions:
* Rename the D2 dmd binary to dmd2
That's what I was thinking...
and make sure it uses a different
config file for each to use the right libs.
but IIRC the la
BCS wrote:
Does anyone have a good solution to installing both D1 and D2 on the
same system?
Possible solutions:
* Rename the D2 dmd binary to dmd2 and make sure it uses a different
config file for each to use the right libs.
* Install them in different directories and use a script to updat
Does anyone have a good solution to installing both D1 and D2 on the same
system?
Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:
> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Dan wrote:
> > That sounds great, and seems like yet another reason for me to switch to D
> > (other than the removal of header files which always seemed like a kludge).
> >
> > Just for the record though, I think one can initialize/b
This is more a tutorial which I'll put up on a wiki, but one question I have is
why can't 0..8 work in a randomCover, and wouldn't it be nice to use regex for
creating a range ("[A-Z]" being all uppercase letters)?
Selecting randomly from a collection of elements is common and usually entails
s
Dan wrote:
That sounds great, and seems like yet another reason for me to switch to D
(other than the removal of header files which always seemed like a kludge).
I heard that the compiler can change the padding bytes to non-null on
some occasions. For example, the compiler could treat member
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Dan wrote:
> That sounds great, and seems like yet another reason for me to switch to D
> (other than the removal of header files which always seemed like a kludge).
>
> Just for the record though, I think one can initialize/blank/calloc C structs
> too, but the
That sounds great, and seems like yet another reason for me to switch to D
(other than the removal of header files which always seemed like a kludge).
Just for the record though, I think one can initialize/blank/calloc C structs
too, but the problem is that some struct elements (of the same arra
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Dan wrote:
> Structs can't easily be compared in C because of potential 'padding' inside
> the struct which may (or may not) exist.
>
> I was jut wondering if D somehow gets round this, and allows something like
> memcmp to easily compare two structs.
As grauzon
Structs can't easily be compared in C because of potential 'padding' inside the
struct which may (or may not) exist.
I was jut wondering if D somehow gets round this, and allows something like
memcmp to easily compare two structs.
Dan wrote:
Structs can't easily be compared in C because of potential 'padding' inside the
struct which may (or may not) exist.
I was jut wondering if D somehow gets round this, and allows something like
memcmp to easily compare two structs.
How about using the == operator?
div0 wrote:
Thanks Simen,
That's nicer than the chained static ifs.
Is there anyway to get rid of the enum though?
I would believe this to work:
template createHandlerCode( T... ) if ( is( T == msgRangeHdlr ) ) {
string format( ) {
return createMessageRangeHandler!(T
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jason House wrote:
> div0 wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Thanks Simen,
>>
>> That's nicer than the chained static ifs.
>> Is there anyway to get rid of the enum though?
>>
>> Using the enum is a pain as it means you
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 4:04 PM, bearophile wrote:
> MikeWh:
>> Why in the world would complex types be dropped from D?
>
> Andrei wants to cut them away from the language. And his power in the design
> of the language is great. So saying such things here isn't going to help
> much. So you can s
div0 wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Thanks Simen,
>
> That's nicer than the chained static ifs.
> Is there anyway to get rid of the enum though?
>
> Using the enum is a pain as it means you have to edit that import
> anytime you need to create a specialistion.
It'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thanks Simen,
That's nicer than the chained static ifs.
Is there anyway to get rid of the enum though?
Using the enum is a pain as it means you have to edit that import
anytime you need to create a specialistion.
Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
> div0 wrote:
21 matches
Mail list logo
