On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 20:18:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
The GCC C compiler proves you wrong :) They have warnings. I
guess it's
a hack (because printf really doesn't belong into the
compiler) but that
doesn't matter. What matters is user-friendliness.
Indeed. dmd should warn about any i
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 00:25:57 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Currently this code compiles and runs with no errors:
class Foo {
override string toString() const {
return "Foo";
}
}
void main() {
import std.stdio;
const Foo[] foos = [new Foo];
writeln(foos);
}
On Apr 9, 2012 12:09 PM, "vmars316" wrote:
>
> On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 12:52:47 UTC, Kevin Cox wrote:
>
>> I think rcc is the Qt resource compiler. I'm not at my computer at the
>> moment to check, but if so it will translate xml resource files into D
>> source.
>
>
> "I think rcc is the Qt re
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 23:22:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 00:20:20 Brad Anderson wrote:
A user in IRC was having difficulty using std.algorithm.sort
on a
static array. It appears to be due to static arrays don't pass
the isRandomAccessRange constraint.
static
On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 00:20:20 Brad Anderson wrote:
> A user in IRC was having difficulty using std.algorithm.sort on a
> static array. It appears to be due to static arrays don't pass
> the isRandomAccessRange constraint.
>
> static assert(isRandomAccessRange!(uint[5]));
>
> Results in:
>
On 04/09/2012 03:20 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:
A user in IRC was having difficulty using std.algorithm.sort on a static
array. It appears to be due to static arrays don't pass the
isRandomAccessRange constraint.
static assert(isRandomAccessRange!(uint[5]));
Results in:
Error: static assert (isRa
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 17:24:35 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 4/9/12, q66 wrote:
Positional specifier works just fine for me.
Which version are you using? I'm on 2.058.
git
A user in IRC was having difficulty using std.algorithm.sort on a
static array. It appears to be due to static arrays don't pass
the isRandomAccessRange constraint.
static assert(isRandomAccessRange!(uint[5]));
Results in:
Error: static assert (isRandomAccessRange!(uint[5u])) is
fa
On 04/09/2012 08:50 AM, Jonas H. wrote:
On 04/09/2012 05:39 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I don't think the compiler can warn about this. Isn't printf one of
those unsafe C variadic functions? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
The GCC C compiler proves you wrong :) They have warnings. I guess it's
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 18:34:36 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
You're going to need to step
back from the build system for a moment and either use dfl.exe
or the dmd command suggested. If your program is more than one
file, make a program that is only one file.
My only observation is -gui is
On 04/09/2012 10:35 AM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 4/9/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Posix positional arguments seem to work for writefln but not format for
whatever reason. Report it as a bug.
Thanks, http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7877
Thanks. I hadn't seen this branch of the
On 04/09/2012 10:24 AM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 4/9/12, q66 wrote:
Positional specifier works just fine for me.
Which version are you using? I'm on 2.058.
Positional parameters[*] are supported in 2.058. This example prints the
same argument in decimal, hexadecimal, octal, and binary:
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 17:35:41 UTC, vmars316 wrote:
and my Bud.Bat looks like this:
bud myForm.d -info -gui -version=gui -run -V
pause
Well, now you've added a level of indirection, which just makes
identifying an issue even harder. You're going to need to step
back from the build syst
On 04/09/2012 07:22 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I think most mentions of printf should just be removed from the dpl
docs except maybe a few special places. People (or rather C++
refugees) seem to expect D to be a syntax sugared version of C++, but
this myth has to be busted.
I don't think that's
On 2012-04-09 19:56, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Then c.data cannot be the same reference as foo.data.
Counter-case:
void bar( const Foo foo)
{
auto c = foo.clone(); // assume this works;
*(cast(int*)c.data) = 6; // note even though I'm casting, there is no
removal of const, so this should be
On Monday, April 09, 2012 19:51:17 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-04-09 17:30, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> > // untested
> > inout(Foo) clone() inout {
> > return new inout(Foo)(data);
> > }
> >
> > Note, you can't post-assign data, since inout is effectively const
> > inside an inout function.
On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 13:51:17 -0400, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-04-09 17:30, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
// untested
inout(Foo) clone() inout {
return new inout(Foo)(data);
}
Note, you can't post-assign data, since inout is effectively const
inside an inout function.
-Steve
Ok, that wor
Maybe related to this?
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7864
On 2012-04-09 17:30, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
// untested
inout(Foo) clone() inout {
return new inout(Foo)(data);
}
Note, you can't post-assign data, since inout is effectively const
inside an inout function.
-Steve
Ok, that works. But then I want to modify the clone:
void bar (const Foo
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 03:23:52 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
Thanks,
I have DFL here: C:\D\dmd2\windows\bin\DFL
and Entice here: C:\D\dmd2\windows\bin\Entice
I decided to take the BUD route from here:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/build
And I installed it here: C:\D\dmd2\vmPrograms\BUDsrc
a
On 4/9/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Posix positional arguments seem to work for writefln but not format for
> whatever reason. Report it as a bug.
Thanks, http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7877
On Monday, April 09, 2012 19:08:54 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> import std.string;
>
> void main()
> {
> string foo = "foo";
> string bar = format("%s %s %s", foo);
> }
>
> format expects 3 arguments, but what I really want is foo to be used
> for all 3 specifiers and not repeat 'foo' 3 times manuall
On 4/9/12, q66 wrote:
> Positional specifier works just fine for me.
Which version are you using? I'm on 2.058.
On 4/9/12, Artur Skawina wrote:
> However, there's no reason why *std.stdio* should expose the raw printf
> function - i didn't even realize it did until now...
> It either shouldn't be available via std.stdio at all, or something
> like this wrapper should be added there, to catch the inevitable
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 17:09:03 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
import std.string;
void main()
{
string foo = "foo";
string bar = format("%s %s %s", foo);
}
format expects 3 arguments, but what I really want is foo to be
used
for all 3 specifiers and not repeat 'foo' 3 times manually.
import std.string;
void main()
{
string foo = "foo";
string bar = format("%s %s %s", foo);
}
format expects 3 arguments, but what I really want is foo to be used
for all 3 specifiers and not repeat 'foo' 3 times manually. Are there
any format specifiers that do what I want? I've tried usi
On 04/09/12 17:39, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 4/9/12, Jonas wrote:
>> On Saturday, 7 April 2012 at 22:42:19 UTC, Stefan wrote:
>>> printf is a C function which expects 0-terminated strings. D's
>>> strings are variable-length arrays and not zero-terminated.
>>>
>>> Don't use printf. Try using wri
Jonas:
Could you please elaborate on this a bit more? What's the
problem with helpful compiler messages?
Walter likes helpful error messages, but I think he doesn't want
to:
1) Use too much time to improve them. There are usually more
important problems to fix.
2) Slow down the compiler (or
On 04/09/2012 05:39 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
I don't think the compiler can warn about this. Isn't printf one of
those unsafe C variadic functions? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
The GCC C compiler proves you wrong :) They have warnings. I guess it's
a hack (because printf really doesn't b
On Sun, 08 Apr 2012 01:08:09 -0400, dnewbie wrote:
I have a wchar[] and I want to convert it to UTF8
then append a string. This is my code.
import std.c.windows.windows;
import std.string;
import std.utf;
int main()
{
wchar[100] v;
v[0] = 'H';
v[1] = 'e';
v[2] = 'l';
v[3] = 'l'
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 12:52:47 UTC, Kevin Cox wrote:
I think rcc is the Qt resource compiler. I'm not at my
computer at the
moment to check, but if so it will translate xml resource files
into D
source.
"I think rcc is the Qt resource compiler."
I don't know what the above means.
What
On 4/9/12, Jonas wrote:
> On Saturday, 7 April 2012 at 22:42:19 UTC, Stefan wrote:
>> printf is a C function which expects 0-terminated strings. D's
>> strings are variable-length arrays and not zero-terminated.
>>
>> Don't use printf. Try using writef instead. Same arguments.
>
> http://d.puremag
On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 11:22:54 -0400, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-04-09 16:52, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 04/09/2012 04:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
But now when I compile this code I get this error:
Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (this.data) of type
const(void*) to void*
Any idea h
On Sunday, 8 April 2012 at 03:55:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, April 08, 2012 00:21:35 Jonas wrote:
1) First off, I really couldn't figure out were I was supposed
to
post this sort of message. Apparently there aren't any mailing
lists (a la Google groups) for D?
These are both n
On 2012-04-09 16:52, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 04/09/2012 04:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
But now when I compile this code I get this error:
Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (this.data) of type
const(void*) to void*
Any idea how to solve this? Or would I need to drop const.
--
/Jacob C
On Saturday, 7 April 2012 at 23:58:20 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Jonas:
Hello D community! :-)
Welcome here.
I was looking for a sane, object-oriented,
possible-to-go-low-level programming language, so I decided to
give D a try today.
D supports OOP well enough, but template-based programmi
On Saturday, 7 April 2012 at 22:42:19 UTC, Stefan wrote:
printf is a C function which expects 0-terminated strings. D's
strings are variable-length arrays and not zero-terminated.
Don't use printf. Try using writef instead. Same arguments.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7872
On 04/09/2012 04:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
But now when I compile this code I get this error:
Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (this.data) of type
const(void*) to void*
Any idea how to solve this? Or would I need to drop const.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
Either clone the data too or u
Say I have type and a function look like this:
class Foo
{
void* data;
Foo clone ()
{
auto c = new Foo;
c.data = data;
return c;
}
}
void bar (Foo foo)
{
auto c = foo.clone();
...
}
Since I'm not changing anything on "foo" I thought that it coul
On Apr 8, 2012 10:59 PM, "vmars316" wrote:
>
> Greetings,
> I would also like to try out QTD.
>
> So far, I have set things up this:
> C:\D\dmd2\QT
>
> I made a .batch file for both drcc.exe and duic.exe .
> duic.exe gave no feedback.
>
> drcc.exe gave the following feedback:
>
> C:\D\dmd2\QT\bin>
On Monday, 9 April 2012 at 09:09:05 UTC, James Miller wrote:
* Eyyub [2012-04-09 01:14:32
+0200]:
Hello,
How can I rewrite the exemple 2 (http://pastebin.com/q50903Zh)
in D
lang. ?
This source code doesn't work...why ?
http://paste.pocoo.org/show/wy1kDIpqTi2ApRuOxRRb/
Thx. :)
What you
* Eyyub [2012-04-09 01:14:32 +0200]:
> Hello,
>
> How can I rewrite the exemple 2 (http://pastebin.com/q50903Zh) in D
> lang. ?
> This source code doesn't work...why ?
> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/wy1kDIpqTi2ApRuOxRRb/
>
> Thx. :)
>
What you want is something like this:
class Value(int
42 matches
Mail list logo
