On Saturday, 4 February 2017 at 15:23:53 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 4 February 2017 at 12:56:55 UTC, osa1 wrote:
- Automatic but conservative. Can leak at any time.
All GCs are prone to leak, including precise ones. The point of
garbage collection is not to prevent leaks, but rath
On Wednesday, 8 February 2017 at 17:21:03 UTC, Oleg B wrote:
If I understand correctly with vanilla LDC I can't
cross-compiling from host linux-x86_64, but with your patch I
can. Right?
Right. Joakim Noah has worked on LDC for Android and as far as I
know provides some prebuilt compilers, a n
On Wednesday, 8 February 2017 at 16:21:49 UTC, kinke wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 February 2017 at 14:57:41 UTC, Oleg B wrote:
Hello all! I want to build ldc cross compiller. I found this
instruction
https://wiki.dlang.org/LDC_cross-compilation_for_ARM_GNU/Linux, but I have some doubts: will it work
On Wednesday, 8 February 2017 at 14:57:41 UTC, Oleg B wrote:
Hello all! I want to build ldc cross compiller. I found this
instruction
https://wiki.dlang.org/LDC_cross-compilation_for_ARM_GNU/Linux,
but I have some doubts: will it works with ldc-1.1.0?
Particularly interested in the patch
htt
Hello all! I want to build ldc cross compiller. I found this
instruction
https://wiki.dlang.org/LDC_cross-compilation_for_ARM_GNU/Linux,
but I have some doubts: will it works with ldc-1.1.0?
Particularly interested in the patch
https://gist.githubusercontent.com/claudemr/3367c13095b15d449b159
Hi,
Is there a native D implementation of B+ tree anywhere?
So far I have found only std.container.rbtree but I wanted to
compare both algorithms regarding search performance, memory and
cpu usage, and storage space required for serialization.
Thanks in advance.
On Tuesday, 7 February 2017 at 14:26:11 UTC, MGW wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 February 2017 at 13:37:01 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
Here still example
https://pp.vk.me/c636630/v636630885/46579/neSdIip1ySI.jpg
I'm sorry for being offensive, but...
Of course, and the next step will be pragma mangle on D fu
Wrapup: I am going to go for the original approach of index
conversion, and leaving the offset-pointer approach for what it
is.
Reasons:
1) uncertain efficiency gain/loss,
2) theoretically it may fail,
3) .sizeof does not include the payload,
4) analysis of the assembler generated by our refere
On 02/07/2017 11:47 PM, Dmitry wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 February 2017 at 07:41:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
test.naturalSort would sort the array in place before calling writeln
and 'test' would appear naturally sorted as well. I've fixed it like
this:
Great! Thank you!
Well, the title sort is