On Friday 04 February 2011 16:09:08 Sean Kelly wrote:
> Adam Conner-Sax Wrote:
> > 1) I couldn't get the synchronized class version (as opposed to using
> > synchronized statements in the functions) to run. It would hang in odd
> > ways.
> >
> > This may be related to a bug I reported earlier (a
== Quote from Sean Kelly (s...@invisibleduck.org)'s article
> Adam Conner-Sax Wrote:
> >
> > 1) I couldn't get the synchronized class version (as opposed to using
> > synchronized statements in the functions) to run. It would hang in odd
> > ways.
> > This may be related to a bug I reported earl
Peter Alexander Wrote:
>
> Things might be easier if the error messages associated with D's
> concurrent features weren't especially unhelpful (for example, trying to
> spawn a thread with reference type parameters just gives you a 'no match
> for spawn template' error). It's nice that it stops
Adam Conner-Sax Wrote:
>
> 1) I couldn't get the synchronized class version (as opposed to using
> synchronized statements in the functions) to run. It would hang in odd ways.
> This may be related to a bug I reported earlier (and Sean was helpful enough
> to fix!) so this may be moot.
'synchro
Peter Alexander Wrote:
>
> How would you do it with message passing though? As I understand, all of
> the std.concurrency message passing routines are blocking, and I need
> this to be asynchronous.
What do you mean by blocking? The receive call will block until a message
matching one of the
On 02/05/2011 12:21 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
Things might be easier if the error messages associated with D's concurrent
features weren't especially unhelpful (for example, trying to spawn a thread
with reference type parameters just gives you a 'no match for spawn template'
error). It's nice t
On 4/02/11 8:42 PM, spir wrote:
On 02/04/2011 07:18 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
I would like to be able to spawn a thread, which does a lot of work,
and then
returns (in some way) the result of its computations to the main
thread. I
would really like to avoid copying its results if possible.
Log
spir Wrote:
> (I have few exp in the paradigm, so don't believe me.)
>
> It seems your problem is a typical case that cannot be safe as is.
> Essentially,
> IIUC, you want a shared set of data to be fed (more generally: mutated) from
> a
> thread, while another thread (here, the main one) pro
On 4/02/11 8:23 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
Peter Alexander Wrote:
Essentially, the work that doWork does needs to be returned to the main
thread asynchronously, and obviously in a thread-safe manner.
What's the best way to do this? The above won't work because ~= isn't
atomic, so you can't do i
On 02/04/2011 02:31 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
Ellery Newcomer Wrote:
I think this was the impetus for foreach_reverse, or at least it is one
place where it is pretty handy. Don't remember what all there is in D1,
but in D2 you could do something like
foreach_reverse(i; 0u .. 10u){
// iterates
On Friday 04 February 2011 12:31:06 Jesse Phillips wrote:
> Ellery Newcomer Wrote:
> > I think this was the impetus for foreach_reverse, or at least it is one
> > place where it is pretty handy. Don't remember what all there is in D1,
> > but in D2 you could do something like
> >
> > foreach_rever
On 02/04/2011 07:18 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
I would like to be able to spawn a thread, which does a lot of work, and then
returns (in some way) the result of its computations to the main thread. I
would really like to avoid copying its results if possible.
Logically, what I would like is some
Ellery Newcomer Wrote:
> I think this was the impetus for foreach_reverse, or at least it is one
> place where it is pretty handy. Don't remember what all there is in D1,
> but in D2 you could do something like
>
> foreach_reverse(i; 0u .. 10u){
> // iterates over 9,8,7 .. 1,0
> }
There was so
Peter Alexander Wrote:
> Essentially, the work that doWork does needs to be returned to the main
> thread asynchronously, and obviously in a thread-safe manner.
>
> What's the best way to do this? The above won't work because ~= isn't
> atomic, so you can't do it on shared data.
Disclaimer: I
I think this was the impetus for foreach_reverse, or at least it is one
place where it is pretty handy. Don't remember what all there is in D1,
but in D2 you could do something like
foreach_reverse(i; 0u .. 10u){
// iterates over 9,8,7 .. 1,0
}
for more complex iterations, I suppose you're stu
On 02/04/2011 05:14 PM, eles wrote:
recently i was hit by an old-known programming error, using unsigned int in for
loops could get into infinite traps:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/665745/whats-the-best-way-to-do-a-reverse-
for-loop-with-an-unsigned-index
Aha! was trapped as well recent
Adam Conner-Sax:
> I wrote the tester as an exercise in learning D. The language is great;
> perfect for me as someone who loved generics in C++ but found that all the
> cool things you could do got ugly and messy fast.
Few notes on the form of your code:
- I suggest to use module names all in l
On 2/4/11, bearophile wrote:
> Most of Phobos is written in D, and D distributions contain full source
> code, so in similar cases you just need to take a look at the sources of
> Phobos and do some experiments to locate the problem.
Yeah. I was in the middle of something so I was too lazy to go
> I will file it in bugzilla:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5524
Andrej Mitrovic:
> std.path is supposed to work on strings, it doesn't touch std.file at all.
> Why can't it run at compile time?
Most of Phobos is written in D, and D distributions contain full source code,
so in similar cases you just need to take a look at the sources of Phobos and
do some
I would like to be able to spawn a thread, which does a lot of work, and
then returns (in some way) the result of its computations to the main
thread. I would really like to avoid copying its results if possible.
Logically, what I would like is something like this:
class LotsOfData { ... }
v
eles:
> so, i D (1 or 2) is counter-attacking in some way (for example, disabling
> implicit casting of (-1) to UINT_MAX).
I don't understand your question very well, but at the moment D is doing nearly
nothing to avoid this kind of bugs (I have written probably tens of posts on
this topic, wit
Heinz:
> This results in a much robust code.
That's the right way to do it, with a D fallback.
> You are right too about the "load-load-load processing-processing-processing
> store-store-store instead a load-processing-store load-processing-store
> load-processing-store" thing. I'll modify m
bearophile,
Thank you so much for all your help. It seems you're very into ASM.
I kept the D_InlineAsm_X86 in my code as you suggested. The code i gave here was
just an example. But my code's version implementation looks like this:
version(D_InlineAsm_X86)
{
// ASM Code.
}
else
{
// D cod
import std.path : join;
enum rootdir = r"C:\Path\";
enum testdir = join(rootdir, "simple");
void main() { }
enumBug.d(4): Error: variable __arrayArg774 is used before initialization
enumBug.d(4): Error: cannot evaluate
join("C:\\Path\\","simple",(const(char)[][0u] __arrayArg774 = void;
, cast
hi everybody,
recently i was hit by an old-known programming error, using unsigned int in for
loops could get into infinite traps:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/665745/whats-the-best-way-to-do-a-reverse-
for-loop-with-an-unsigned-index
so, i D (1 or 2) is counter-attacking in some way (for
attaching more files...
begin 644 PrettyPrint.d
M:6UP;W)T('-T9"YF;W)M870[#0II;7!O7!E8V]N&-E<'1I;VX[#0II;7!OTPL0RQ2?0T*#0H-"G-TPT*("!A=71O(&$@/2!A<'!E;F1E2!J=7-T:69Y+"`-"@D)"2`@("!I;B!S
M=')I;F=;72!F;W)M871S+"!I;B!4(&%R9W,I#0I[#0H@(&5N9F]R8V4H8V]L
M=6UN7W=I9'1H3L-"B`@5M=(&IUPT*
M("`@(&$N<'5T*&9O5MK7
[sorry for double posting, first sent this to D's general list by error]
Hello,
I have a working lexing toolkit that allows defining a lexer from a language's
"morphology", then let it scan sources. The result is a 'LexemeStream' struct,
which just wraps an array of Lexeme's; for simplicity, e
On 2011-02-03 17:03, Jesse Phillips wrote:
Alex Folland Wrote:
The problematic string:
Guaton_at_9min59sec.WAgame
Might I suggest using a simpler regex? It gives the ability to do better error
checking/reporting. Instead of adding all the misspellings for minute and
second, just capture t
Heinz:
> void myFunct()
> {
> uint* p = myarray.ptr;
> asm
> {
> mov EBX, p;
>
> mov EAX, [EBX + 4];
> rol EAX, 8;
> mov [EBX + 4], EAX;
>
> mov EAX, [EBX + 8];
> rol EAX, 16;
> mov [EBX + 8], EAX;
>
> mov EAX, [EBX + 1
30 matches
Mail list logo
