On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 15:24:08 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 5/11/18 8:53 AM, Alex wrote:
This behaves differently, w.r.t. to an arbitrary method, like
"operator". Why? Is there any workaround?
operators don't follow pointers.
Imagine if you had a struct that overloads "+" and th
On 5/11/18 2:49 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, May 11, 2018 14:31:17 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-
learn wrote:
On 5/11/18 1:25 PM, Danny Arends wrote:
Hey all,
I have been working on creating a multi-threaded application, so I have
a shared configuration object which hold se
On Friday, May 11, 2018 14:31:17 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-
learn wrote:
> On 5/11/18 1:25 PM, Danny Arends wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I have been working on creating a multi-threaded application, so I have
> > a shared configuration object which hold several command line parameters
>
On 5/11/18 1:25 PM, Danny Arends wrote:
Hey all,
I have been working on creating a multi-threaded application, so I have
a shared configuration object which hold several command line parameters
(which I fill using getopt).
The problem is that I get deprecation warnings when trying to set
nu
On Friday, May 11, 2018 18:01:18 Danny Arends via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 17:49:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Friday, May 11, 2018 17:25:44 Danny Arends via
> >
> > Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> >> [...]
> >
> > getopt is designed to be single-threaded. The ke
On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 17:49:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, May 11, 2018 17:25:44 Danny Arends via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
[...]
getopt is designed to be single-threaded. The keyword shared is
not used a single type in that module. If you want to use
shared with anything in
On Friday, May 11, 2018 17:25:44 Danny Arends via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I have been working on creating a multi-threaded application, so
> I have a shared configuration object which hold several command
> line parameters (which I fill using getopt).
>
> The problem is that I get
On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 17:25:44 UTC, Danny Arends wrote:
Hey all,
I have been working on creating a multi-threaded application,
so I have a shared configuration object which hold several
command line parameters (which I fill using getopt).
The problem is that I get deprecation warnings wh
Hey all,
I have been working on creating a multi-threaded application, so
I have a shared configuration object which hold several command
line parameters (which I fill using getopt).
The problem is that I get deprecation warnings when trying to set
numerical values:
/usr/include/dmd/phobos
On 5/11/18 8:53 AM, Alex wrote:
This behaves differently, w.r.t. to an arbitrary method, like
"operator". Why? Is there any workaround?
operators don't follow pointers.
Imagine if you had a struct that overloads "+" and then you wanted to
use pointer arithmetic, but instead it called ptr.o
On Friday, May 11, 2018 14:02:22 Nicholas Wilson via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> -
> module a;
>
> struct foo {}
>
> deprecated alias bar = foo;
>
> --
> module b;
> struct bar {};
>
>
> ---
> module c;
>
> import a;
> import b;
>
> void baz(bar b) {}
>
> Error: `a.bar` at
-
module a;
struct foo {}
deprecated alias bar = foo;
--
module b;
struct bar {};
---
module c;
import a;
import b;
void baz(bar b) {}
Error: `a.bar` at source/a.d(5,1) conflicts with `b.bar` at
.b.d(2,1)
I would have thought the undeprecated alias would have bee
On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 12:53:08 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 12:35:52 UTC, TED_996 wrote:
[...]
Yeah, right guess in the title ;)
you have to put the "pragma lib" again. Take the use of "pragma
lib" in the binding as an information saying "you have to do
this too".
So
On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 12:53:08 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 12:35:52 UTC, TED_996 wrote:
[...]
Yeah, right guess in the title ;)
you have to put the "pragma lib" again. Take the use of "pragma
lib" in the binding as an information saying "you have to do
this too".
Ok
Hi all,
I'm sure, I didn't find something obvious, but:
Given this:
ยดยดยด
void main()
{
auto s = S();
s.operator;
assert(s.myOp(42));
assert(42 in s);
auto sptr = new S();
sptr.operator;
assert(sptr.myOp(42));
//assert(42 in sptr);
On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 12:35:52 UTC, TED_996 wrote:
I've been trying to debug this for a long time now. I am trying
to build one of the msgpack examples
(examples/upacker_foreach.d) and the linking failed. I have
since succeeded and I'm trying to find out if this is intended
behavior or a b
I've been trying to debug this for a long time now. I am trying
to build one of the msgpack examples (examples/upacker_foreach.d)
and the linking failed. I have since succeeded and I'm trying to
find out if this is intended behavior or a bug in D (not msgpack,
I think).
TL;DR: it seems to me
On Thursday, 10 May 2018 at 19:14:39 UTC, Meta wrote:
So it looks like disabling a struct's postblit actually counts
as having a __postblit and __xpostblit function (don't ask me
why), in addition to a construction and opAssign... no idea
why, and maybe this is a bug, but I bet there's a good
18 matches
Mail list logo
