On 07/09/2013 02:32 PM, Artur Skawina wrote:
IIRC this issue is already reported somewhere in bugzilla.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
On 07/03/2013 07:21 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:14:33PM -0700, Ali Çehreli wrote:
[...]
import std.stdio;
import std.conv;
void main()
{
auto a = to!double(151.42499);
writefln(%.60f, a);
}
I wouldn't write it like that; IMO it's better to write:
On 06/26/2013 10:51 PM, Gary Willoughby wrote:
Just for a bit of fun, I saw this question posted on reddit the other
day and wondered how *you* would solve this in D?
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/731832/interview-question-ffn-n
int f(int x){ return x?(x1?x:-x)+(x0?1:-1):0; }
unittest{
On 06/27/2013 09:48 PM, John Colvin wrote:
On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 18:37:26 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 06/26/2013 10:51 PM, Gary Willoughby wrote:
Just for a bit of fun, I saw this question posted on reddit the other
day and wondered how *you* would solve this in D?
http
On 06/22/2013 09:52 PM, Timothee Cour wrote:
Is there a reason the language spec disallows this?
void main(){
auto a=mixin(1);//OK
alias b=a;//OK
mixin(alias c=a;);//OK
// alias c=mixin(a);//NG : Error: basic type expected, not mixin
}
No, it is arbitrary.
On 06/22/2013 10:20 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-06-22 19:11, monarch_dodra wrote:
I don't see what's so terrible about it: If A can do it, I don't see
what an instance of a couldn't?
The problem is that you cannot overload on static. That is, have a two
methods with the same name, one
On 06/22/2013 11:51 PM, Timothee Cour wrote:
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch
mailto:timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote:
On 06/22/2013 09:52 PM, Timothee Cour wrote:
Is there a reason the language spec disallows this?
void main
On 06/16/2013 07:20 PM, Geancarlo Rocha wrote:
On Sunday, 16 June 2013 at 02:12:02 UTC, Geancarlo Rocha wrote:
I expected the memory to ramp up in the first couple iterations and
eventually reach a stable point, but for some reason, windows task
manager shows it increases on every iteration.
On 06/16/2013 08:37 PM, Geancarlo Rocha wrote:
...
the current GC is unreliable, booo!
No it is not. You are not even allocating GC-controlled memory during
the loop.
This is a std.container.BinaryHeap issue. It never shrinks the
underlying container.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/
If
On 06/05/2013 05:11 PM, ParticlePeter wrote:
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/79c29c19
(What you want to do does not work, but the issue is not that UFCS
does not work with opCall. It does.)
Thanks for the insights, undfortunatelly you're right. Is this behaviour
on purpose, or considered a bug ?
On 06/03/2013 06:25 PM, ParticlePeter wrote:
UFCS is working with opCall already.
The reason your code does not work is that UFCS only works with
module-level symbols (and with the latest release also for locally
imported symbols IIRC.)
What do you mean with locally import symbols, isn't
On 05/30/2013 06:45 PM, bearophile wrote:
...
If you have to store many reals, they require more memory than doubles
(how much is relative to the operating system). Regarding speed in
theory double and real should give the same, ...
If double uses xmm registers and real uses the fpu registers
On 05/31/2013 09:08 PM, John Colvin wrote:
On Friday, 31 May 2013 at 16:17:28 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 05/31/2013 04:28 AM, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Timon Gehr
timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote:
If double uses xmm registers and real uses the fpu registers
On 05/31/2013 01:28 PM, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote:
If double uses xmm registers and real uses the fpu registers (as is standard
on x64), then double multiplication has twice the throughput of real
multiplication on recent intel
On 05/27/2013 09:55 PM, Gary Willoughby wrote:
This is quite an open ended question but i wondered how you guys debug
your D programs (i'm talking about stepping through code, setting
breakpoints, etc). The lack of nice IDE's with integrated debuggers is
worrying when working with D but up until
On 05/23/2013 07:21 PM, Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote:
On Wed, 22 May 2013 23:28:21 -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Wednesday, May 22, 2013 21:31:53 Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Wed, 22 May 2013 21:16:44 -0400, Jonathan Crapuchettes
jcrapuchet...@gmail.com wrote:
Can anyone tell me why
On 05/21/2013 11:31 PM, Diggory wrote:
...
It would be very easy to introduce paradoxes
This is the case already.
if this were possible, simply use a static if to call something only if it is
unreachable.
I don't think this would be possible because function-local symbols are
not
On 05/17/2013 07:19 PM, bearophile wrote:
Jonathan M Davis:
However, if it _never_ makes sense to declare a variable
beginning with two underscores, I don't know why the compiler wouldn't
forbid
it other than the fact that it probably inserts such variables prior
to when
it would do the
On 05/15/2013 04:16 PM, ref2401 wrote:
Interface member functions can have in/out contracts but why abstract
class member functions can not?
abstract class Base
{
@property int field();
void foo() in { assert(field 0); }
// Error: function main.Base.foo in and out contracts require
On 05/13/2013 10:27 PM, Timothee Cour wrote:
While writing DIP40, I came upon the following question:
how to instantiate explicitly template parameters for both the
class/struct AND the constructor?
for example: struct A(T1){this(T2)(){...}} ? (T2 could be used
somehow inside the ctor body for
On 05/14/2013 01:25 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 05/13/2013 10:27 PM, Timothee Cour wrote:
While writing DIP40, I came upon the following question:
how to instantiate explicitly template parameters for both the
class/struct AND the constructor?
for example: struct A(T1){this(T2)(){...}} ? (T2
On 05/11/2013 04:34 PM, TommiT wrote:
...
// CTFE internal error: unsupported assignment this = Test(123)
...
An internal error is always a compiler bug.
On 04/28/2013 09:45 PM, Namespace wrote:
That surprised me a bit. Is that expected?
import std.stdio;
struct A { }
interface IFoo {
void bar(ref const A);
}
class Foo : IFoo {
void bar(ref const A a) {
}
void bar(const A a) {
return this.bar(a);
}
}
On 04/29/2013 12:57 PM, Sumit Raja wrote:
Hi,
I wanted some help in converting this
void av_log_ask_for_sample(void *avc, const char *msg, ...)
av_printf_format(2, 3);
from C to D.
I don't know what it means or is called in C to start with so I am a bit
lost on what to search for.
Thanks
On 04/29/2013 02:17 PM, 1100110 wrote:
...
What is the difference between const(char)*, and const(char*)? I have
seen them used pretty much interchangeably...
Are they? Somehow I don't think they are.
Variables of type const(char)* can be mutated, while const(char*) cannot be.
void main(){
On 04/26/2013 10:15 PM, bearophile wrote:
Tyro[17]:
While flip2 does:
flip2!foo(a, b, c) === foo(b, a, c)
flip2!foo(a, b, c, d) === foo(b, a, c, d)
and this rotate
Really? Just swapping the first two arguments and leaving the others at
their place is for a rotate?
Why flip in the
On 04/25/2013 05:09 PM, bearophile wrote:
...
What do you think?
...
I think what you call flip2 should be called flip.
On 04/24/2013 10:25 PM, Namespace wrote:
import std.stdio;
int[2] getSize() {
return [42, 23];
}
int width() {
return getSize()[0];
}
void main()
{
writeln(Hello world!);
}
Compilation output:
Internal error: ../ztc/cgcs.c 343
http://dpaste.1azy.net/a1897e84
I
On 03/27/2013 01:01 PM, TommiT wrote:
I'd like to get a definite answer to whether the following code is valid
or not:
struct S
{
int v = 42;
this(int val) { v = val + 1; }
enum s = S(4);
}
void main()
{
static assert(S.s.v == 5);
}
Valid.
There's a bug report about
On 03/28/2013 09:34 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
The following code fails to compile:
void foo (inout int[] arr)
{
auto dg = {
foreach (i, e ; arr) {}
};
dg();
}
void main ()
{
auto a = [3, 4, 5];
foo(a);
}
Error message:
main.d(9): Error: variable
On 03/17/2013 01:54 PM, simendsjo wrote:
I get a lot of these errors, and they can be quite tricky to get around
and hurts my API.. Is this a temporary restriction in DMD, or is it
another reason why this doesn't work?
Error: template instance template!local cannot use local 'local' as
On 03/17/2013 05:15 PM, simendsjo wrote:
On Sunday, 17 March 2013 at 15:45:54 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 03/17/2013 01:54 PM, simendsjo wrote:
I get a lot of these errors, and they can be quite tricky to get around
and hurts my API.. Is this a temporary restriction in DMD, or is it
another
On 03/12/2013 10:47 PM, Zach the Mystic wrote:
void func(string[2] a) {}
void func2(T...)(T args) {
static assert(is(typeof(args[0]) == string[2]));
}
void func3(T...)(T args) {
static assert(args[0].length == 2);
}
func([,]); // Okay
func2([,]); // Error: (is(string[] ==
On 03/14/2013 01:48 AM, Jeremy DeHaan wrote:
Hey guys!
I am working on a binding for D, and am almost finished! I started to
think of some things I might like to work on to improve the binding
after I get everything working, and one of the things I thought of was
rewriting certain parts to use
On 03/12/2013 06:51 PM, Stephan Schiffels wrote:
...
Thanks, I had a brief look at std.algorithm.joiner but couldn't find
anything obvious, maybe I should look deeper into it.
...
I guess it is because of the following:
Eg (similar code occurs two times):
...
if (_sep.empty)
{
On 03/09/2013 10:35 AM, Andrea Fontana wrote:
...
this works. Is this:
bool[typeof(_fun((ElementType!Range).init))] mySet;
the right way?
It's ok, but the redundant parentheses around the element type are
confusing.
On 03/06/2013 05:20 PM, Andre wrote:
Am 06.03.2013 17:01, schrieb Andrej Mitrovic:
On 3/6/13, Andre an...@s-e-a-p.de wrote:
I wonder why UCFS is not working for the MIXIN statement?
UFCS is a function feature, not a statement feature. And mixin is a
statement, not a function.
I suspected
On 03/05/2013 08:53 AM, cal wrote:
I'm confused about this:
import std.conv;
void main()
{
enum s = `1`.to!int;;
enum c = __traits(compiles, mixin({auto a = new ~s~;})); // line 1
mixin(auto a = ~s~;); // line 2
}
This does not compile, giving errors about instantiating
On 03/04/2013 09:06 PM, Andrea Fontana wrote:
If I understand it correctly something like:
range.filter!(...).map!(...)
browse range 2 times, one for filter and one for mapping doesn't it?
It does not.
Is there a way to parallelize this kind of operations?
Interleaving is the default.
On 01/31/2013 05:48 AM, estew wrote:
void main() {
float[3] v1 = [1.0, 2.0, 3.0];// No error
float[3] v = [1.0, 2.0, 3.0].dup; // Fails at runtime with error message
}
...
It fails at compile time?
The reason is that array literals have special conversion rules:
Eg:
bool[] x
On 01/20/2013 03:21 PM, Zhenya wrote:
Hi!
Am I doing something wrong?
import std.stdio;
template gun(alias f)
{
void gun()
{
f();
}
}
void main()
{
auto str = hello;
enum fun = (){writeln(str);};//replace enum - auto to compile
gun!fun();
}
On 01/20/2013 03:41 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
...
void main()
{
auto ship = new Ship;
alias T = typeof(ship);
foreach (m; __traits(allMembers, T))
{
writefln(member %s, m);
enum atrs = __traits(getAttributes, mixin(T.stringof ~ . ~ m));
This only works
On 01/20/2013 04:55 AM, F i L wrote:
Ali Çehreli wrote:
The following program produces this output:
[...code...]
Awesome! Thanks, I wasn't expecting it to actually be as easy as that. I
tried all sort of difference combinations with __traits(allMembers, ..)
but it looks like I just needed to
On 01/14/2013 07:26 AM, 1100110 wrote:
On 01/13/2013 11:35 PM, 1100110 wrote:
Ok, I wish to create a standard timing system so that I can measure ~how
long each function takes to execute.
I wish to be able to place at the start of a function
version(Time) mixin TimeExecution(funcName);
mixin
On 12/11/2012 05:58 PM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 December 2012 at 16:45:54 UTC, cal wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 December 2012 at 15:38:38 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 December 2012 at 14:57:27 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
:/
I got it to work with a cast, which removes the
On 12/06/2012 02:04 PM, bearophile wrote:
Currently this code is not supported:
void foo(T)(T x, T function(T) f) {}
void main() {
foo(1, (int a) = a * a); // OK
foo(1, a = a * a); // Error
}
With the latest alpha compiler it gives:
test.d(4): Error: template test.foo does
On 12/07/2012 11:12 PM, bearophile wrote:
Timon Gehr:
I consider it necessary.
To consider opening an enhancement request, are you able to explain us
why?
It is just embarrassing if it does not work. Similar things work even in
C#. Of course, it is harder in D because the type system
On 12/01/2012 06:23 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:05:49 Artur Skawina wrote:
So, unless there's a way to do it without a cast, you're stuck. And I have
no idea how you could possibly do it without a cast.
*cast(void**)O // assuming O is a class
Are you
On 12/01/2012 12:13 AM, Aytug wrote:
So I have installed dmd, gdc, emacs and d-mode.el on my Debian
machine.
I can compile the program fine with M-compile. The problem starts
after that.
I cannot run the output file properly from within emacs. Either
there is a way and I cannot find it, or
On 11/23/2012 07:09 PM, dsmith wrote:
What is the best way to have a function sort an associative array by
key? The following yields a conversion error.
double[string] aa_sort(double[string] aa) {
return aa.keys.sort;
}
A hash table is unsorted by definition. What is it that you want to
On 11/23/2012 07:48 PM, dsmith wrote:
On Friday, 23 November 2012 at 18:24:07 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 11/23/2012 07:09 PM, dsmith wrote:
What is the best way to have a function sort an associative array by
key? The following yields a conversion error.
double[string] aa_sort(double[string
On 11/22/2012 11:33 PM, Maxime Chevalier wrote:
One of the reasons I chose to use D for my project is that I was very
excited about the prospect of using CTFE in mixin code. Unfortunately,
there seems to be one (or several?) bugs causing CTFE to be very slow
and to hog a huge amount of memory
On 11/20/2012 11:56 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
...
clearly, as if with static arrays, you'd have to be careful with slices being
passed around, since they're not owned by the GC. And I'm not sure what would
happen if you were foolish enough to try and append to them.
...
It works as expected.
On 11/21/2012 12:22 AM, Maxime Chevalier wrote:
I need to pass an array literal as a template parameter. The reference
on this website seems to imply this is possible, but doesn't illustrate
it. The obvious way doesn't seem to work:
mixin template MyTemplate(int[] arr) {}
Error:
On 11/18/2012 09:19 AM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Saturday, 17 November 2012 at 23:28:21 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 11/18/2012 12:14 AM, Manfred Nowak wrote:
Maxim Fomin wrote:
related to the issue?
... I can see that the definition is ambiguous. And if the coder
didnt't realize
On 11/18/2012 12:14 AM, Manfred Nowak wrote:
Maxim Fomin wrote:
related to the issue?
... I can see that the definition is ambiguous. And if the coder
didnt't realize the ambiguousness as you do ...
-manfred
The code given in the original post is valid D code.
On 11/10/2012 03:32 PM, bearophile wrote:
Do you remember if Hara has implemented a patch to allow a2 to be
immutable?
int[] foo1(int x) pure {
return null;
}
int[] foo2(string s) pure {
return null;
}
void main() {
immutable a1 = foo1(10); // OK
immutable a2 = foo2(hello);
On 11/10/2012 10:12 AM, Manfred Nowak wrote:
Timon Gehr wrote:
In theory yes, but
[...]
What a pity. Because in the code given only the types Elem!0 and Elem!1
must be indeed initialized.
...
In this specific case, yes. But as this is an undecidable property in
general, detecting
On 11/10/2012 01:20 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
The following example:
void main()
{
void[][size_t] aa;
aa[1] = [1, 2, 3];
if (auto a = 1 in aa)
{
writeln(*(cast(int[]*) a));
writeln(cast(int[]) *a);
}
}
Will print:
[1, 2, 3, 201359280, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
On 11/10/2012 05:21 PM, bearophile wrote:
Timon Gehr:
It is strongly pure regardless of potential aliasing in the return
value. This is a bug.
This can't be strongly pure:
int[] foo2(int[] a) pure {
a[0]++;
return a;
}
Bye,
bearophile
The point was that the code you gave
On 11/09/2012 07:49 PM, Jack Applegame wrote:
Because this is a learning group and not a teaching group--and you did
not report on your fruitless tries: go on.
-manfred
This is not only std::function feature. In C++ we can call
member-function by combining potinter to object and pointer to
On 11/09/2012 09:13 PM, Jack Applegame wrote:
Ok. I will try to explain what exactly i need.
...
The following works. You can also use a (scoped) delegate in order to
allow the caller to close over his context.
import std.stdio;
class Figure {
void draw(){}
void erase(){}
}
class
On 11/09/2012 09:31 PM, Jack Applegame wrote:
On Friday, 9 November 2012 at 20:22:40 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
The following works. You can also use a (scoped) delegate in order to
allow the caller to close over his context.
Wow! Great! Thanks.
But I can't understend this syntax:
x=x.draw
On 11/09/2012 02:17 PM, Manfred Nowak wrote:
Rob T wrote:
The above template definitions define exactly the same structure
as the original
No, they implement not _exactly_ the same structure, because they
supply more freedom than the original templates version. The original
version forced a
On 11/09/2012 10:32 PM, Manfred Nowak wrote:
Timon Gehr wrote:
The example definitely exposes a bug in DMD.
The D front end I am developing can already handle it.
May I guess, that your front end is also able to handle this code:
struct Elem( size_t myNumber) {
Elem!( myNumber +1)* next
On 11/09/2012 10:24 PM, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
Timon:
The D front end I am developing can already handle it.
Developed in D, I suppose?
Yes.
How long does the hello world program take? I guess it is just that the
D program has a slightly higher startup cost than the C program.
On 10/30/2012 02:53 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 02:22:42 Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/30/2012 01:43 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 00:29:22 Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/30/2012 12:17 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, October 29, 2012 23:38:34
On 10/30/2012 09:16 PM, Tobias Pankrath wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 October 2012 at 19:16:18 UTC, Dan wrote:
So until this bug is fixed any time I have any dynamic array,
including string in struct S, implement opEquals. When the bug is
fixed I can remove them. What I didn't realize is that including
On 10/29/2012 12:03 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, October 29, 2012 11:42:59 Zhenya wrote:
Hi!
Tell me please,in this code first and second static if,are these
equivalent?
with arg = 1, __traits(compiles,check(arg);) = true,
is(typeof(check(arg))) = false.
In principle,
On 10/30/2012 12:17 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, October 29, 2012 23:38:34 Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/29/2012 12:03 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, October 29, 2012 11:42:59 Zhenya wrote:
Hi!
Tell me please,in this code first and second static if,are these
equivalent?
with arg
On 10/30/2012 01:43 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 00:29:22 Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/30/2012 12:17 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, October 29, 2012 23:38:34 Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/29/2012 12:03 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, October 29, 2012 11:42:59
On 10/24/2012 12:45 PM, mist wrote:
Actually it is awesome.
But all the code breakage.. eh.
Obviously T[] should support indexing for any T.
This is the definition of an array.
On 10/24/2012 01:07 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:42:59 mist wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 October 2012 at 17:36:53 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On 2012-10-23, 19:21, mist wrote:
Hm, and all phobos functions should operate on narrow strings
as if they where not
On 10/23/2012 05:58 PM, mist wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 October 2012 at 15:55:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 10/23/12 11:36 AM, mist wrote:
Was thinking on this topic after seeing this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13014999/cannot-slice-taker-from-std-range-in-d
Still can't
On 10/24/2012 01:07 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 00:28:28 Timon Gehr wrote:
The other valid opinion is that the 'mistake' is in Phobos because it
treats narrow character arrays specially.
If it didn't, then range-based functions would be useless for strings
On 10/18/2012 11:45 PM, bearophile wrote:
Era Scarecrow:
It's an easy mistake to make. Maybe the compiler should issue a
warning when opAssign attempts and fails and opOpBinary is defined.
This would have to be implemented very carefully. There are enough
hard to reproduce symbol
On 10/19/2012 01:05 AM, Era Scarecrow wrote:
On Thursday, 18 October 2012 at 22:07:55 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/18/2012 11:45 PM, bearophile wrote:
There are other cases. Generally the D compiler should add some
warnings that help against operator overloading mistakes.
I don't think
On 10/19/2012 01:23 AM, bearophile wrote:
Era Scarecrow:
Maybe.. A general warning when something starts with 'op(Op)?[A-Z]'
but doesn't actually qualify as any of the override-able operators?
That seems sensible...
Regarding operator overloading there are several situations worth
warning
On 10/19/2012 02:12 AM, bearophile wrote:
Timon Gehr:
What situations?
This thread has already shown two possible cases worth discussing about.
This report shows two more cases:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8844
How is that bug-prone? Are there keyboards where
On 10/16/2012 05:57 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
...
At NG discussion it may look nice to define some type and then add
operator overloading methods
Operator overloading is not magic, so your statement can be shortened to
... and then add methods
Which is still not correct, because that is not
On 10/14/2012 09:14 AM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Sunday, 14 October 2012 at 07:01:30 UTC, Tommi wrote:
Actually, it seems that alias this has precedence over UFCS. So, a
free function opUnary wouldn't ever suit better than an actual method
opUnary of the thing referred to by that alias this.
On 10/14/2012 09:01 AM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Saturday, 13 October 2012 at 19:50:02 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
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
On 10/17/2012 10:15 PM, sclytrack wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 October 2012 at 19:46:51 UTC, bearophile wrote:
sclytrack:
It doesn't give an error when marking the function with safe.
@safe
int[] create()
{
}
I think marking it @safe is not relevant. In theory a good type system
should give an
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
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
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
On 10/13/2012 04:22 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
...
// PROBLEM #1: due to PROBLEM #1, this causes an
// infinite recursion that eventually overflows
// the stack.
...
I'm sure it does :).
@topic: yes this is a bug.
On 10/05/2012 04:09 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
...
This workaround makes the compiler happy:
void foo (inout(int)[] arr)
{
auto a = (inout int) { auto b = arr[0]; };
}
But probably not what you want. :/
IIRC, inout has bugs and incomplete implementation. I think this should
be in the bug
On 10/07/2012 10:35 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, October 07, 2012 10:25:41 Tommi wrote:
The following compiles, which I'm pretty sure must be a bug,
right? Just checking to be sure I won't be polluting the bug
tracker.
void main()
{
auto f = (int i) {};
static assert
On 10/03/2012 03:53 PM, Sharp wrote:
I found something what I don't understand.
Here is a simplifed code with comments:
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/a914d11a
I creating anonymous delegates, whose function is to modify their
parameter. Their parameters are different class references.
I pass these
On 10/02/2012 10:48 PM, ixid wrote:
Without optimization the range and algorithm method takes about 10 times
as long as the simple code below it, with no array bounds checking and
optimization it takes six times as long. Why is the difference so huge?
I'd expect a moderate overhead but that's a
On 10/03/2012 12:11 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
...
$ cat ixidbench.d
module main;
import std.stdio, std.algorithm, std.range, std.datetime;
enum MAX = 10_000_000_000UL;
void main() {
StopWatch sw;
sw.start;
auto sum1 = MAX.iota.map!(x = x * x).reduce!a + b;
sw.stop
On 09/29/2012 06:26 PM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 16:05:03 UTC, ixid wrote:
This behaviour seems inconsistent and unintuitive:
void main() {
int[3] a = [1,2,3];
a = [4, a[0], 6];
struct S {
int a, b, c;
}
S s = S(1,2,3);
s = S(4,
On 09/27/2012 03:01 PM, Namespace wrote:
Is there any difference between these two code snippets:
#1:
struct Foo(T : Object) {
#2:
struct Foo(T) if (is(T == class)) {
?
I ask because I prefer option #1, but I see most often in Phobos variant
#2.
Yes there is:
struct S{
Object o;
On 09/25/2012 08:41 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Monday, 24 September 2012 at 22:13:51 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/24/2012 09:41 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
[SNIP]
I don't think this does what you think it does. The 'is(R r)' declares
r to be an alias for R. So 'r' is a type in that code snippet
On 09/26/2012 03:50 PM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 September 2012 at 13:19:13 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/25/2012 08:41 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Monday, 24 September 2012 at 22:13:51 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/24/2012 09:41 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
[SNIP]
I don't think
On 09/26/2012 05:08 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/26/12 9:50 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
struct S{};
is(typeof(takeExactly(S, 1)) == S) //false
is(S == typeof(takeExactly(S, 1))) //Error: template
std.range.takeExactly does not match any function template declaration
Neither should work.
On 09/24/2012 09:41 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
...
Regarding the .init issue, I hadn't thought of that, but it can
be worked around pretty easily with an is(R r):
template Hello(R)
if ( is(R r)
is(typeof(takeExactly(r, 1)))
is(R == typeof(takeExactly(r,
On 09/23/2012 01:54 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I'm trying to test whether a template argument is the type returned by
takeExactly, and I haven't been able to sort out the template voodoo required
yet. It would be a lot easier if I had a variable to work with, but I just
have the type, and the
201 - 300 of 838 matches
Mail list logo
