Sergey Gromov Wrote:
> Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:59:51 -0500, Zoran Isailovski wrote:
>
> > Anyway, following the latter pattern, you don't need global analysis.
> > You can determine if n is on the stack (it is - it's an argument),
> > you can determine if it's referenced from within the closure (it i
Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:59:51 -0500, Zoran Isailovski wrote:
> Anyway, following the latter pattern, you don't need global analysis.
> You can determine if n is on the stack (it is - it's an argument),
> you can determine if it's referenced from within the closure (it is),
> and you can determine if t
Zoran Isailovski:
> I like the approach of Ada, Oberon, and (I think) Modula-3 - all of which
> have successfully been used for system programming - in that they allow
> unsafe constructs ONLY in modules specifically marked as "unsafe".<
This is already becoming true in the last version of DMD.
Reply to Zoran,
Christopher Wright Wrote:
I'd rather stop here, because this is probably not the place to
discuss these things. But perhaps you can direct me to a discussion
group or sth.?
Don't worry, This NG has a long standing tradition of epic rambling OT threads
("[~ot] why is programm
Reply to Zoran,
BCS Wrote:
Reply to Zoran,
I don't think it is restrictive if the compiler prevented a
situation that would otherwise lead to a run-time error anyway, or
worse, weird and confusing run-time behavior. In my case, if the
compiler couldn't SAFELY handle a reference to the argume
Christopher Wright Wrote:
> Zoran Isailovski wrote:
> > Oh... I've got the wrong impression from the papers about D. (But then, why
> > would someone design an *unsafe* language *by intention*??? For that, we've
> > got C and C++, don't we?)
> >
> > Anyway, I've been looking for a modern and *s
Simen Kjaeraas Wrote:
> Zoran Isailovski wrote:
>
> > Oh... I've got the wrong impression from the papers about D. (But then,
> > why would someone design an *unsafe* language *by intention*??? For
> > that, we've got C and C++, don't we?)
>
> Because we want D to be the new C/C++? :p
>
>
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Christopher Wright wrote:
> D tries to make it easy to do the safe thing. It's a systems language, so it
> has to allow you to do unsafe things without too much trouble -- but usually
> with some not-too-pretty syntax to indicate that you're doing something
> unsaf
Zoran Isailovski wrote:
Oh... I've got the wrong impression from the papers about D. (But then, why
would someone design an *unsafe* language *by intention*??? For that, we've got
C and C++, don't we?)
Anyway, I've been looking for a modern and *safe* language, but without the
overkill of a J
Sergey Gromov Wrote:
> Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:24:39 -0500, Zoran Isailovski wrote:
>
> > Denis Koroskin Wrote:
> >
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
> wrote:
>
> > I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> > closures (and C
Zoran Isailovski wrote:
Oh... I've got the wrong impression from the papers about D. (But then,
why would someone design an *unsafe* language *by intention*??? For
that, we've got C and C++, don't we?)
Because we want D to be the new C/C++? :p
D is unsafe in that it lets you shoot yourse
BCS Wrote:
> Reply to Zoran,
>
> > I don't think it is restrictive if the compiler prevented a situation
> > that would otherwise lead to a run-time error anyway, or worse, weird
> > and confusing run-time behavior. In my case, if the compiler couldn't
> > SAFELY handle a reference to the argumen
Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:24:39 -0500, Zoran Isailovski wrote:
> Denis Koroskin Wrote:
>
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
wrote:
> I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> closures (and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. Wh
Reply to Zoran,
I don't think it is restrictive if the compiler prevented a situation
that would otherwise lead to a run-time error anyway, or worse, weird
and confusing run-time behavior. In my case, if the compiler couldn't
SAFELY handle a reference to the argument n outside the enclosing
func
Reply to Zoran,
Thx, Denis, but I'm still confused. The stack thing was also my first
thought. But when I tried to actually explain the dynamics that way, I
came to the conclusion that then, test1() shouldn't have worked
either.
what might be happening is that test1 is not using up enough st
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Zoran Isailovski wrote:
> I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed closures
> (and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While experimenting with D
> closures and delegates, I was stroke by a phenomenon I cannot explain.
Denis Koroskin Wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:28:01 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
> wrote:
>
> > Denis Koroskin Wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> >> > closures (and C#
Denis Koroskin Wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:18:28 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
> wrote:
>
> > Denis Koroskin Wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> >> > closures (and C#
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:28:01 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
wrote:
Denis Koroskin Wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
wrote:
> I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> closures (and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While
experimenting
Denis Koroskin Wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
> wrote:
>
> > I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> > closures (and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While experimenting
> > with D closures and delegates, I was stroke by a
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:18:28 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
wrote:
Denis Koroskin Wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
wrote:
> I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> closures (and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While
experimenting
Frits van Bommel Wrote:
> Zoran Isailovski wrote:
> > I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> > closures (and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While experimenting
> > with D closures and delegates, I was stroke by a phenomenon I cannot
> > explain. Here's th
Denis Koroskin Wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
> wrote:
>
> > I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
> > closures (and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While experimenting
> > with D closures and delegates, I was stroke by a
Zoran Isailovski wrote:
I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed closures
(and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While experimenting with D closures
and delegates, I was stroke by a phenomenon I cannot explain. Here's the code:
[snip]
Handler incBy(int n)
{
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:03 +0300, Zoran Isailovski
wrote:
I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed
closures (and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While experimenting
with D closures and delegates, I was stroke by a phenomenon I cannot
explain. Here's t
I'm an experienced C#, Java and Python programmer, and have employed closures
(and C# delegates) upon numerous occasions. While experimenting with D closures
and delegates, I was stroke by a phenomenon I cannot explain. Here's the code:
module closures01;
import std.stdio;
alias int delegate(i
26 matches
Mail list logo
