The dmd compiler comes with some example code. One of the
examples is for COM.
Does this work for anyone else? The dll registration code is
failing: SetKeyAndValue() failed.
Other output looks good:
OLE 2 initialized
hMod = 268435456
LoadLibraryA() succeeded
pfn = 100033E0, fn = 'DllRegister
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 17:01:27 UTC, Tommi wrote:
Another way to describe my reasoning...
According to TDPL, if var is a variable of a user-defined type,
then:
++var
gets rewritten as:
var.opUnary!"++"()
Not always. If user-defined type has an alias this to integer
member, than som
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 22:34:19 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
OK, before this thread devolves into a shouting match, I'd like
to
understand what was the rationale behind this restriction. What
were the
reasons behind not allowing a non-member function to overload an
operator? What are the pro
On 10/13/2012 06:53 PM, Charles Hixson wrote:
> If std.stream is being deprecated, what is the correct way to deal with
> file BOMs. This is particularly concerning utf8 files, which I
> understand to be a bit problematic, as there isn't, actually, a utf8
> BOM,
That's correct. There is just one
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 18:53:48 Charles Hixson wrote:
> If std.stream is being deprecated, what is the correct way to deal with
> file BOMs. This is particularly concerning utf8 files, which I
> understand to be a bit problematic, as there isn't, actually, a utf8
> BOM, merely a convention
If std.stream is being deprecated, what is the correct way to deal with
file BOMs. This is particularly concerning utf8 files, which I
understand to be a bit problematic, as there isn't, actually, a utf8
BOM, merely a convention which isn't a part of a standard. But the
std.stdio documentatio
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 22:19:44 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Wait, there's such a thing as overloading 'is'? If there is,
that's pretty messed up. The 'is' operator is used for a lot of
fundamental stuff, and allowing structs and classes to change
that just sounds ... wrong.
Sure there is
On 10/14/2012 12:36 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:12:01AM +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/13/2012 10:15 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
but they _aren't_ mixed and they will _never_ be mixed. If it had
_ever_ been intended that it be possible to overload operators as
free f
Era Scarecrow:
I'm curious why this would break and not work, as is should
compare against it's location/entity correct? I wonder why it
breaks then for structs on the stack. I can only find 'opIs
missing' when searching for it, so...
"is" is meant to perform a bitwise comparison (I think t
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:12:01AM +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 10/13/2012 10:15 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
> >but they _aren't_ mixed and they will _never_ be mixed. If it had
> >_ever_ been intended that it be possible to overload operators as
> >free functions, then we'd simply have made
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:40:04PM +0200, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> I'm curious why this would break and not work, as is should compare
> against it's location/entity correct? I wonder why it breaks then
> for structs on the stack. I can only find 'opIs missing' when
> searching for it, so...
[...]
On 10/13/2012 10:15 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
...
construct is using syntactic sugar such as UFCS, because _all_ of that
syntactic sugar must be lowered to code which _isn't_ syntactic sugar anymore.
That is not what lowering means.
It would be far more expensive to have to continually make
Thanks, guys!
I will definitely pick up TDPL!
And I have seen the online book by Ali Çehreli, and actually
have a copy saved. It is a great source.
Thanks again for all the input!
I'm curious why this would break and not work, as is should
compare against it's location/entity correct? I wonder why it
breaks then for structs on the stack. I can only find 'opIs
missing' when searching for it, so...
struct X {
int x;
}
class Y {
int y;
}
Y y1 = new Y();
Y y2 = n
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 19:01:26 Tommi wrote:
> Another way to describe my reasoning...
>
> According to TDPL, if var is a variable of a user-defined type,
> then:
> ++var
> gets rewritten as:
> var.opUnary!"++"()
>
> Thus, it would be very logical to assume that it doesn't matter
> whether
On 10/13/2012 06:02 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
...
Different groups of people have different mind and same things produce
different sense on them. From my point of view operator overloading
methods are special functions and not treating them as candidates for
UFCS does make more sense.
I do not und
On 10/13/2012 05:42 AM, Lubos Pintes wrote:
> So this means there is no chance to obtain the TDPL legally in some
> accessible format?
My copy of the TDPL says "free online edition with the purchase of this
book." It's supposed to be an Safari Online Books.
> For blind, PDF or even paper makes
Another way to describe my reasoning...
According to TDPL, if var is a variable of a user-defined type,
then:
++var
gets rewritten as:
var.opUnary!"++"()
Thus, it would be very logical to assume that it doesn't matter
whether you write:
++var
...or, write the following instead:
var.opUnary!"
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 16:02:25 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
From my point of view operator overloading methods are
special functions and not treating them as candidates for
UFCS does make more sense.
I can think of only one thing that makes custom operator methods
"special" or different f
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 15:06:14 UTC, Tommi wrote:
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 11:50:40 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
I think implementing UFCS operator overloading is problematic.
Firstly, you want to put this language addition too far.
I don't see this as taking UFCS functionality "fur
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 11:50:40 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
I think implementing UFCS operator overloading is problematic.
Firstly, you want to put this language addition too far.
I don't see this as taking UFCS functionality "further". Rather,
I think it's simply more logical that with U
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:29:29AM +0200, Jeremy DeHaan wrote:
> I've been using D for a few months now, and i love it. It dawned on
> me that it would be nice to have some books to go over though!
>
> I saw "The D Programming Language" by Andrei Alexandrescu on Amazon,
> and I almost bought it wh
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 21:43:07 +0200, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
You mean at compile-time? Try this: http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/06b95c3f
Copied below:
[SNIP]
That's pretty ingenious!
On 10/13/12, Lubos Pintes wrote:
> Although I thought about refactoring, which I know is not available yet,
> this was very interesting example (for me as newbye).
Ah ok. Well it wouldn't be too difficult to write a small D script
that does this on source files. You wouldn't need a full-fledged
p
On 10/13/12, Jordi Sayol wrote:
> $ dmd -op -H -o- atk/Action.d gio/DBusProxy.d -Hdinclude
Damn, I never knew what -op did (it should mention it's useful for -H). Thanks.
Not that the "titanic" but the authors, probably, have used Java
and another type of cas result returns.
So this means there is no chance to obtain the TDPL legally in some
accessible format? I mean similar to chapter 1, which is released on
dlang.org. For blind, PDF or even paper makes no sense...
Well, PDF sometimes, but rarely.
Dňa 13. 10. 2012 11:40 Jonathan M Davis wrote / napísal(a):
On Sa
Al 13/10/12 11:29, En/na Jeremy DeHaan ha escrit:
> I've been using D for a few months now, and i love it. It dawned on me that
> it would be nice to have some books to go over though!
>
> I saw "The D Programming Language" by Andrei Alexandrescu on Amazon, and I
> almost bought it when I saw it
On Friday, 12 October 2012 at 23:30:39 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
I would be grateful if someone share singly linked list based
on cas()
There's a sample Stack and SList implementation in the
concurrency chapter:
http://www.informit.com/articles/printerfriendly.aspx?p=1609144
Of course, I r
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 10:00:22 UTC, Tommi wrote:
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 09:50:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
It is most definitely _by design_ that you cannot
overload operators except as member functions.
I don't understand this design choice then. I don't see any
problem
On 2012-10-13 01:26, Sean Kelly wrote:
Here are my results:
$ dmd -release -inline -O dtest
$ ll input.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 sean staff 365105313 Oct 12 15:50 input.txt
$ time dtest
real 1m36.462s
user 1m32.468s
sys 0m1.102s
Then I ran my SAX style parser example on the same input file:
On 2012-10-12 21:06, Aziz K. wrote:
What? You don't like my soft, green colours? Shame on you! :P
Hehe :)
Ok, I'm not happy with the style myself, but I want to concentrate on
functionality more atm.
Understandable. I'm not very good with design and graphics myself so I
probably shouldn't
On 2012-10-12 16:55, Aziz K. wrote:
That was a good read, but unfortunately it deterred me from using
submodules. Sounds like too much trouble for me. It's not worth the
hassle if it requires that much care and attention. Only git can get
away with such atrocious usability issues. lol
Ok, I ac
On 2012-10-12 17:05, Aziz K. wrote:
Yeah, no disagreement there. It's working fine thanks to the awesome
work SiegeLord put into porting it to D2. I'll definitely stay with
Tango, but external dependencies can be quite annoying, so maybe I'll
just copy the modules I need and leave the rest.
Ok
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 09:50:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
It is most definitely _by design_ that you cannot
overload operators except as member functions.
I don't understand this design choice then. I don't see any
problem in allowing UFCS operators. Because of the way UFCS
works,
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 11:41:07 Tommi wrote:
> On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 09:06:28 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> > Do note that this says *method* call. Your example doesn't use
> > methods. Hence, the current state of operator overloading is
> > consistent with TDPL.
>
> I don't agree wit
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 09:06:28 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
Do note that this says *method* call. Your example doesn't use
methods. Hence, the current state of operator overloading is
consistent with TDPL.
I don't agree with the last sentence. According to TDPL:
1) "whenever at least one
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 11:29:29 +0200
"Jeremy DeHaan" wrote:
> I've been using D for a few months now, and i love it. It dawned
> on me that it would be nice to have some books to go over though!
>
> I saw "The D Programming Language" by Andrei Alexandrescu on
> Amazon, and I almost bought it whe
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 11:29:29 Jeremy DeHaan wrote:
> I've been using D for a few months now, and i love it. It dawned
> on me that it would be nice to have some books to go over though!
>
> I saw "The D Programming Language" by Andrei Alexandrescu on
> Amazon, and I almost bought it when
I've been using D for a few months now, and i love it. It dawned
on me that it would be nice to have some books to go over though!
I saw "The D Programming Language" by Andrei Alexandrescu on
Amazon, and I almost bought it when I saw it was written in 2010.
I know that D is under development,
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 11:06:27 Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 08:36:19 UTC, Tommi wrote:
> > Quote from TDPL: "D’s approach to operator overloading is
> > simple: whenever at least one participant in an operator
> > expression is of user-defined type, the compiler rewr
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 08:36:19 UTC, Tommi wrote:
Quote from TDPL: "D’s approach to operator overloading is
simple: whenever at least one participant in an operator
expression is of user-defined type, the compiler rewrites the
expression into a regular method call with a specific name.
Quote from TDPL: "D’s approach to operator overloading is
simple: whenever at least one participant in an operator
expression is of user-defined type, the compiler rewrites the
expression into a regular method call with a specific name. Then
the regular language rules apply."
According to the
Blindly replacing identifiers is certainly not what I need, I want for
example
FormStartPosition.CENTER_SCREEN to be written like
FormStartPosition.centerScreen;
Enums in DGUI are written like
enum FormStartPosition {
CENTER_SCREEN = SOME_WINDOWS_API_VALUE,
...
}
I need SOME_WINDOWS_API_VALU
Although I thought about refactoring, which I know is not available yet,
this was very interesting example (for me as newbye).
Dňa 12. 10. 2012 21:43 Andrej Mitrovic wrote / napísal(a):
On 10/12/12, Lubos Pintes wrote:
Hi,
I am still playing with DGUI library. Besides other things, I would li
45 matches
Mail list logo
