I'm using a wrapper (or what ever it's called ) that I made on top of
DAllegro binding of the C library Allegro).
But I get this error when exiting a DAllegro program with my JEC2
library. It's a long standing problem I've had. I think it's my JEC2
library that makes it fail.
An exception wa
If I have
class Bar(T)
{
}
void foo(Y)()
{
...
}
Is there a way to check inside foo() that Y is in some way an instantiation of
Bar? Is there a way to find WHICH instantiation it is?
On 02/17/2011 01:49 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
Ali �ehreli Wrote:
... if the iterated object offers the slice operator with no arguments
lst[], __c is initialized with lst[] instead of lst. This is in order to
allow "extracting" the iteration means out of a container without
requiring the conta
Ali Çehreli Wrote:
>
> ... if the iterated object offers the slice operator with no arguments
> lst[], __c is initialized with lst[] instead of lst. This is in order to
> allow "extracting" the iteration means out of a container without
> requiring the container to define the three iteration p
I followed the directions on http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-osx.html for
the hello.d example and I kept getting an error about __stack_chk_guard.
Is that not implemented yet?
TDPL mentions a very useful feature on page 381 under "12.9.1 foreach
with Iteration Primitives".
(Note: I am copying all of this manually; the typos are mine):
It first shows a function that includes a possible "compiler rewrite" of
a foreach loop:
void proces
On Thursday, February 17, 2011 10:39:20 Jesse Phillips wrote:
> Jonathan M Davis Wrote:
> > Except that @property is for _functions_. You mark a function with
> > @property so that it _acts_ like a variable. @property on a variable is
> > _meaningless_. It would be like marking a variable nothrow.
Jonathan M Davis Wrote:
> Except that @property is for _functions_. You mark a function with @property
> so
> that it _acts_ like a variable. @property on a variable is _meaningless_. It
> would be like marking a variable nothrow. It makes no sense. Neither should
> be
> legal. The fact that
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:58:12 -0500, jam wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 22:00:13 +0100, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 2/16/11, jam wrote:
void main()
{
auto a = [5,1,2,3,4,5,1];
auto index = countUntil(retro(a),5);
writeln(a[a.length-1-index .. a.length]);
}
That works for random-acce
