On 2013-09-10 02:28, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
After I've seen a pretty cool demo of clang-modernize
(http://clang.llvm.org/extra/ModernizerUsage.html), I think the best way
to attack this and similar problems is to add a class hierarchy
analyzer: a command-line utility that is fed an entire
On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 00:28:24 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/9/13 12:47 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:37:07PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
It's been a while since Manu convinced Walter and Andrei to
introduce a virtual Keyword and to change the default from
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 02:28:24 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 9/9/13 12:47 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:37:07PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
It's been a while since Manu convinced Walter and Andrei to
introduce a virtual Keyword and to change
On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:27:40 Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 02:28:24 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 9/9/13 12:47 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:37:07PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
It's been a while since Manu
On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 09:32:58 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
AFAIK, no official decision has ever been made. It seemed like
Walter was
convinced that it was worth it to make non-virtual the default,
and some
discussion went into how to do the transition, but I don't
believe that
Another idea:
Currently the protection labels, like public, private etc. , can
be restored. But other modifier, like const, nothrow, @safe or,
in this case, final can't. I suggest to change this. We could use
default for that purpose. Default could interrupt all modifier
labels and would
On 09/10/2013 02:28 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
...
After I've seen a pretty cool demo of clang-modernize
(http://clang.llvm.org/extra/ModernizerUsage.html), I think the best way
to attack this and similar problems is to add a class hierarchy
analyzer: a command-line utility that is fed an
On 09/10/2013 01:46 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 09/10/2013 02:28 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
...
After I've seen a pretty cool demo of clang-modernize
(http://clang.llvm.org/extra/ModernizerUsage.html), I think the best way
to attack this and similar problems is to add a class hierarchy
On 10/09/13 11:32, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
AFAIK, no official decision has ever been made. It seemed like Walter was
convinced that it was worth it to make non-virtual the default, and some
discussion went into how to do the transition, but I don't believe that Andrei
has ever liked the idea,
On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 18:53:32 Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 10/09/13 11:32, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
AFAIK, no official decision has ever been made. It seemed like Walter was
convinced that it was worth it to make non-virtual the default, and some
discussion went into how to do
On Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 18:42:16 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
What seemed to have convinced Walter was this interview
http://www.artima.com/intv/nonvirtualP.html
where the focus was on code maintainability and how C#'s
approach to
virtuality supported code versioning. However, most
On 9/9/13, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
And even then, it may anger a lot of existing users.
I'm not sure about that. It seems people who actually write
class-based code would prefer to have this (that's my limited analysis
of IRC comments :p).
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:52:21PM +0200, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 9/9/13, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
And even then, it may anger a lot of existing users.
I'm not sure about that. It seems people who actually write
class-based code would prefer to have this (that's my limited
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:37:07PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
It's been a while since Manu convinced Walter and Andrei to
introduce a virtual Keyword and to change the default from virtual
methods to final methods.
Anything new? Anybody working on that? I would love to see that
soon.
This is
It's been a while since Manu convinced Walter and Andrei to
introduce a virtual Keyword and to change the default from
virtual methods to final methods.
Anything new? Anybody working on that? I would love to see that
soon.
On 9/9/13, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
Well, then I stand corrected. :)
You may sit. You get a D.
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:05:18PM +0200, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 9/9/13, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
Well, then I stand corrected. :)
You may sit. You get a D.
Just what I needed: another D in programming. :-P
T
--
A computer doesn't mind if its programs are put to
On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 19:48:50 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:37:07PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
It's been a while since Manu convinced Walter and Andrei to
introduce a virtual Keyword and to change the default from
virtual
methods to final methods.
Anything new?
On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 19:52:34 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
On 9/9/13, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
And even then, it may anger a lot of existing users.
I'm not sure about that. It seems people who actually write
class-based code would prefer to have this (that's my
On 9/9/13 12:47 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:37:07PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
It's been a while since Manu convinced Walter and Andrei to
introduce a virtual Keyword and to change the default from virtual
methods to final methods.
Anything new? Anybody working on that? I
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 05:28:24PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/9/13 12:47 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:37:07PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
It's been a while since Manu convinced Walter and Andrei to
introduce a virtual Keyword and to change the default from virtual
21 matches
Mail list logo
