On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 20:09:22 UTC, Mike Brown wrote:
The error is flagged on the writeln(e.msg). Do I need to do
something special to pass a string to an exception? dup?
No, that code is fine. You're passing a string literal, so
there's no need for a dup.
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 02:05:31PM -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
> Huh, that doesn't look right. This was fixed since June last year, so it
> *should* have made it into the latest compiler releases already. Unless
> this one was missed somehow (but I doubt it).
[...]
Just checked on LDC 1.26.0, t
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 08:30:28PM +, Mike Brown via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 16:28:48 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 03:20:49PM +, Mike Brown via
> > Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> > > On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 15:13:17 UTC, rikki cattermo
On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 16:28:48 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 03:20:49PM +, Mike Brown via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 15:13:17 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
[...]
Right OK, mine says 1/1 unittests failed - but this should say
Modules?
I will
Hi all,
AddressSanitizer is throwing an access-violation error - I've
managed to boil it down to this example:
```d
import std.stdio;
class example: Exception {
this(string msg, string file = __FILE__, size_t line = __LINE__)
{
super(msg, file, line);
}
}
class tes
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 03:00:00PM +, JG via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> Is it specified somewhere which way the following program will be
> interpreted?
>
> import std;
>
> struct A
> {
> int x=17;
> }
>
> int x(A a)
> {
> return 100*a.x;
> }
>
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 03:20:49PM +, Mike Brown via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 15:13:17 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
[...]
> Right OK, mine says 1/1 unittests failed - but this should say
> Modules?
>
> I will interpret it as Modules, ty!
This is a bug that was
On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 15:13:17 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
rdmd -main -unittest file.d
```d
import std.stdio;
unittest
{
writeln("first");
}
unittest
{
writeln("second");
assert(0);
}
```
Output:
```
first
second
onlineapp.d(11): [unittest] unittest failure
1/1 modules FAI
rdmd -main -unittest file.d
```d
import std.stdio;
unittest
{
writeln("first");
}
unittest
{
writeln("second");
assert(0);
}
```
Output:
```
first
second
onlineapp.d(11): [unittest] unittest failure
1/1 modules FAILED unittests
```
The first assert to execute should kill the re
Is it specified somewhere which way the following program will be
interpreted?
import std;
struct A
{
int x=17;
}
int x(A a)
{
return 100*a.x;
}
void main()
{
A a;
writeln(a.x);
}
Hi all,
I'm testing the unittest features of D, and having some issues. I
only seem able to fire one unittest, e.g.
module test;
unittest {
assert(0);
}
unittest {
assert(0);
}
If I run,
rdmd -g -unittest -main "test.d"
It returns,
1/1 unittests FAILED
test.
Hi all,
My goal is to modularise my code better.
I think I'd like to make a static library, this will primarily to
be used in other D projects.
https://dlang.org/articles/dll-linux.html mentions the GC and
linking requirements. I am happy to not use the GC for this
library, what is the best
On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 08:30:29 UTC, Moth wrote:
what's going on?
It's a bug:
[Issue 19178 - Static initialization of 2d static arrays in
structs produces garbage or doesn't compile
sometimes](https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19178)
On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 08:40:51 UTC, jfondren wrote:
The example in the spec is in a function body and you've copied
it to a class body, where the writeln() would also be in error.
I find https://dlang.org/spec/grammar.html quite hard to read
but I imagine there's a state/declaration distinc
On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 08:30:29 UTC, Moth wrote:
```
class ExampleClass
{
double[6][3] matrix = 0; //fails to compile - "Error:
cannot implicitly convert expression `0` of type `int` to
`double[6][3]`"
}
```
evidently i'm doing something wrong here, but i can't
understand what or why
On Thursday, 10 June 2021 at 23:47:33 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Thursday, 10 June 2021 at 21:25:35 UTC, JN wrote:
I have to disagree. I don't see a good reason for this
behavior and it's just one more thing to trip people. I think
it'd be better if such thing was done explicit, something like:
hullo all. i've encountered a bizzare inconsistency.
the following is the [D spec on rectangular
arrays](https://dlang.org/spec/arrays.html#rectangular-arrays):
```
void main()
{
import std.stdio: write, writeln, writef, writefln;
double[6][3] matrix = 0; // Sets all elements to 0.
On Thursday, 10 June 2021 at 20:18:03 UTC, seany wrote:
On Thursday, 10 June 2021 at 19:51:51 UTC, Dennis wrote:
On Thursday, 10 June 2021 at 19:37:36 UTC, seany wrote:
However, i sometimes see, that the results are _radically_
different.
Are you using uninitialized memory or multi-threading?
18 matches
Mail list logo
