Ellery Newcomer wrote:
On 06/22/2010 05:36 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
all calls to assert are removed by the compiler in release mode. I
don't
think there's a way to implement that via a library (it would be nice
though!)
Also
Ali Çehreli wrote:
dcoder wrote:
So, I moved the initialization to inside the main function, and now
it works.
Great. I think we need to put this question in the FAQ.
For future reference, if it really needs to be global:
uint[string] mywords;
static this()
{
mywords = [ Hello :
On 06/23/2010 09:41 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Ali Çehreli wrote:
dcoder wrote:
So, I moved the initialization to inside the main function, and now
it works.
Great. I think we need to put this question in the FAQ.
For future reference, if it really needs to be global:
uint[string] mywords;
Ali Ãehreli:
Could someone please verify whether the above is really necessary?
An initialization inside some runtime function/initializator is necessary
unless the AA is an enum.
Is it
actually a dmd bug that we need to use 'static this()' to initialize an
associative array?
According
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:41:45 -0700, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Ali Çehreli wrote:
dcoder wrote:
So, I moved the initialization to inside the main function, and now
it works.
Great. I think we need to put this question in the FAQ.
For future reference, if it really needs to be global:
Correction:
Of course, you shouldn't call thread_attachThis() for the parent thread. It's
already been attached since the D runtime created it. (In fact, the
documentation says: If [thread_attachThis()] is called for a thread which is
already registered, the result is undefined. My bad.)
BR
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:30:40 +0200, Ali Çehreli acehr...@yahoo.com wrote:
dcoder wrote:
So, I moved the initialization to inside the main function, and now
it works.
Great. I think we need to put this question in the FAQ.
For future reference, if it really needs to be global:
I get the same error.
Fix:
The following code works allright on MacOS X 10.6.4 / DMD v2.047:
module fork;
import core.sys.posix.unistd,
core.thread,// added
std.stdio;
void main()
{
auto pid = fork();
if( pid 0 ) {
thread_attachThis();//
On 22/06/2010 23:05, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Oh my, you caveman! ;) I'd have to go look at all of the changelogs to even
have a clue of what's been changed since then. Oh well, I guess that it
means that you don't have to worry about stuff changing on you each upgrade
by sticking to the same
Using v2.0.47, I get a linker error during compilation w/ the following code.
import time = core.sys.posix.sys.time;
int
main( string[] argv )
{
time.timeval x[4];// the static array of
timevals is the problem
Dnia 22-06-2010 o 23:55:29 Michal Minich michal.min...@gmail.com
napisał(a):
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 17:30:23 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 17:07:02 -0400, Tomek Sowiński j...@ask.me wrote:
Yes, why? It could be implemented in object.d in a similar fashion as
div0:
and now with 2.047 I've been
bitten by the removal of struct initialisers.
What do you mean?
Bye,
bearophile
On page 231, TDPL states that a class can introduce any number of alias
this declarations.
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/class.html#AliasThis states that there
is only one allowed per class.
A quick test shows that dmd agrees with the latter.
Which one is right?
Jonathan M Davis wrote:
div0 wrote:
[... snip of UTF-8 stuff ...]
The UTF char stuff is all painfully complicated, and I _think_ that I more
or less understand it, but I suspect that I don't understand it all that
well. It would be nice if the there were a page in the docs somewhere
14 matches
Mail list logo
