On 2011-05-29 22:28, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Jacob Carlborg" wrote in message
news:iru404$4qp$1...@digitalmars.com...
In DMD 1.068 I get linker errors, missing symbols, on empty strings that
are const. Is this a bug or intentional?
It's an already-reported bug in D1:
http://d.puremagic.com/i
On 2011-05-29 21:43, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> I don't see this option in getopt, is it there?
>
> e.g. If I want to disallow passing "--loud" and "--quite" at the same time.
> I can understand it would be difficult to implement this with getopt's
> current API.
>
> A limited form of this is possi
I don't see this option in getopt, is it there?
e.g. If I want to disallow passing "--loud" and "--quite" at the same time.
I can understand it would be difficult to implement this with getopt's current
API.
A limited form of this is possible to do inline via a delegate. For example:
bool quie
Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
On 24.05.2011 1:33, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I've cloned Phobos just a few minutes ago, and I've tried to build it
with unittests, I'm getting these:
Warning: AutoImplement!(C_6) ignored variadic arguments to the
constructor C_6(...)
--- std.socket(316) broken test --
I'm just starting out in my journey of R&D/evaluation of using D, as a
possible future development platform, for my team at work. I like a lot
of what I see!
Currently we do all our development in Visual Studio, using C/C++ (and
C# for some tools), and it is definitely the 'comfort zone' for the
t
That worked, thanks a lot! I was going nuts as to why it wouldn't work!
Much loves to you!
On 30.05.2011 0:38, Jesse Brands wrote:
Hello there,
For a small chat server thingie I'm making, I decided to use D; finding myself
with a very neat example from listener.d to get a kick start I decided to
pretty much take the example over! However, I'm stuck on a bug I can't truly
wrap my finge
Hello there,
For a small chat server thingie I'm making, I decided to use D; finding myself
with a very neat example from listener.d to get a kick start I decided to
pretty much take the example over! However, I'm stuck on a bug I can't truly
wrap my finger around. Most likely it's my own fault an
"Jacob Carlborg" wrote in message
news:iru404$4qp$1...@digitalmars.com...
> In DMD 1.068 I get linker errors, missing symbols, on empty strings that
> are const. Is this a bug or intentional?
>
It's an already-reported bug in D1:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4315
On 5/29/11, bearophile wrote:
> Andrej Mitrovic:
>
>> C struct initialization in D is also buggy, it doesn't take into
>> account field initializers. It's best to get used to the D way of
>> initializing structs.
>
> I'd like it to be debugged instead :-)
Well if it has already been decided that
Andrej Mitrovic:
> C struct initialization in D is also buggy, it doesn't take into
> account field initializers. It's best to get used to the D way of
> initializing structs.
I'd like it to be debugged instead :-)
Bye,
bearophile
C struct initialization in D is also buggy, it doesn't take into
account field initializers. It's best to get used to the D way of
initializing structs.
In DMD 1.068 I get linker errors, missing symbols, on empty strings that
are const. Is this a bug or intentional?
--
/Jacob Carlborg
Hi everyone,
I'm having some trouble by using threads. I've 3 classes:
class MainClass {
...
__gshared {
TimedCallback callback;
SecondClass instance;
}
void callbackMethod() {...}
void load() {
// loads something... and do:
instance = new SecondClass();
On 2011-05-29 15:01, bearophile wrote:
Jacob Carlborg:
Isn't that struct initialization syntax deprecated or to be deprecated?
You may be right. Sometimes I read about deprecations, and then after a while I
forget it because the alternative (like using the complex numbers of Phobos) is
too
On 29.05.2011 15:03, bearophile wrote:
In D there are pure functions, so I think it's not too much hard for it to tell
apart when the contents of an assert() are pure or not.
My opinion is that the D compiler has to enforce purity inside assert(), to
avoid bugs.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/
Stewart Gordon:
> There are places where the spec fails to make a clear distinction between
> illegal code and
> incorrect code that the compiler may reject if it's smart enough.
In D there are pure functions, so I think it's not too much hard for it to tell
apart when the contents of an asser
Jacob Carlborg:
> Isn't that struct initialization syntax deprecated or to be deprecated?
You may be right. Sometimes I read about deprecations, and then after a while I
forget it because the alternative (like using the complex numbers of Phobos) is
too much ugly by comparison :-)
I think we n
On 29/05/2011 09:44, simendsjo wrote:
The documentation for assert,
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/expression.html#AssertExpression, states that
it's an
error if the assert expression contains side effects, but it doesn't seem the
compiler is
enforcing this.
There are places where the spec
On 2011-05-29 03:56, bearophile wrote:
Era Scarecrow:
I don't seem to have a good explanation why this isn't working.
Also try:
struct Joined {
string name, partof, preReq;
}
struct SubrecordParts {
string name;
int size;
string[] notes;
int identifyBy;
int[]
The documentation for assert,
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/expression.html#AssertExpression,
states that it's an error if the assert expression contains side
effects, but it doesn't seem the compiler is enforcing this.
module assert_sideeffect;
bool b;
bool f() { b = !b; return b; }
void m
== Quote from bearophile (bearophileh...@lycos.com)'s article
> Also try:
> struct Joined {
> string name, partof, preReq;
> }
> Joined[] attached = [
> {"MAST", "DATA", "TES3"},
> {"ANAM","INTV", "FACT"}
> ];
Coming from C, this is exactly what I first tried. However since I don't r
22 matches
Mail list logo
