On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 06:56:29 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
Is this right?
Are you sure you added @safe to the second example?
https://run.dlang.io/is/2RbOwK fails to compile.
On Friday, 9 November 2018 at 09:11:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
No, I didn't. I just used underscores, which has been used with
plain text for emphasis for decades. Supporting markdown, would
involve stuff like backticks for code highlighting
Backticks are from ddoc. What's the other way t
Hi. I have not done any multi-threaded programming before. What I
basically want is to read into the output of a long shellExecute
function each second.
In details, I am calling shellExecute("pkexec dd if=/path/to/file
of=/dev/sdx status=progress && sync");
It's a long running process and dd c
On Sat, 10 Nov 2018 11:47:24 +, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
> On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 06:56:29 UTC, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
>> Is this right?
>
> Are you sure you added @safe to the second example?
> https://run.dlang.io/is/2RbOwK fails to compile.
Maybe take another look at the post you're
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 15:05:38 UTC, helxi wrote:
Hi. I have not done any multi-threaded programming before. What
I basically want is to read into the output of a long
shellExecute function each second.
In details, I am calling shellExecute("pkexec dd
if=/path/to/file of=/dev/sdx st
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 06:56:29 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
The following code doesn't work with @safe -dip1000:
int* p;
int i;
p = &i;
i has a shorter lifetime than p, the compiler complains.
But this code does:
int i;
int* p;
p = &i;
The compiler does this
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 13:53:14 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Friday, 9 November 2018 at 09:11:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
No, I didn't. I just used underscores, which has been used
with plain text for emphasis for decades. Supporting markdown,
would involve stuff like backticks for code
I'm making a Rest API with vibe.d and I have a struct User.
Sometimes I need to return only a few of the fields. So for
example: return User(1, null, "John", null, null, ...);
If I do this, an error occurs: cannot implicitly convert
expression null of type typeof(null) to ...
Thanks.
On Thursday, 8 November 2018 at 23:51:39 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
On Thursday, 8 November 2018 at 23:43:38 UTC, Murilo wrote:
It finally worked, but I can't just compile it normally, I
have to use dub run, I wish it were something simple that I
just download into the folder and then use an import
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 18:47:19 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 13:53:14 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
[...]
There is another possibility. Have the website run (fallible)
heuristics to detect a snippet of code and automatically
generate it. That would leave the maili
On 10.11.2018 22:42, Václav Kozák wrote:
I'm making a Rest API with vibe.d and I have a struct User. Sometimes I
need to return only a few of the fields. So for example: return User(1,
null, "John", null, null, ...);
If I do this, an error occurs: cannot implicitly convert expression null
of ty
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 19:42:47 UTC, Václav Kozák wrote:
I'm making a Rest API with vibe.d and I have a struct User.
Sometimes I need to return only a few of the fields. So for
example: return User(1, null, "John", null, null, ...);
If I do this, an error occurs: cannot implicitly conv
On Saturday, November 10, 2018 6:53:14 AM MST Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-
learn wrote:
> On Friday, 9 November 2018 at 09:11:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > No, I didn't. I just used underscores, which has been used with
> > plain text for emphasis for decades. Supporting markdown, would
> >
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 20:04:21 UTC, aberba wrote:
On Thursday, 8 November 2018 at 23:51:39 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
On Thursday, 8 November 2018 at 23:43:38 UTC, Murilo wrote:
It finally worked, but I can't just compile it normally, I
have to use dub run, I wish it were something simpl
On Sat, 10 Nov 2018 16:25:40 +, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
> Yep, you just over-simplified the first case.
It is too simple to clearly illustrate why the code is invalid, but not so
simple that the compiler accepts that code.
> Consider:
>
> int* p;
> {
> int i;
> p = &i;
> }
> *p =
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 23:29:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
The fact that they got added to ddoc just further degrades it
as a proper, macro-based markup language.
The backticks were added to ddoc because they enabled something
that was *virtually impossible* in ddoc before - proper
On Saturday, November 10, 2018 7:51:36 PM MST Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-
d-learn wrote:
> On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 23:29:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > The fact that they got added to ddoc just further degrades it
> > as a proper, macro-based markup language.
>
> The backticks
17 matches
Mail list logo