On Sunday 18 July 2010 19:47:37 strtr wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation!
> But what you are talking about is implementation, nowhere in the spec does
> it say anything like this (or did I just miss it :).
> I could find only this about scope(failure):
> "scope(failure) executes NonEmptyOrScopeBlo
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmail.com)'s article
> On Sunday 18 July 2010 19:14:11 strtr wrote:
> > I'm not sure whether you missed my point or are simple thinking out loud
> > about unreachable code being a warning.
> > My point was that the unreachable warning was wrong as there i
On Sunday 18 July 2010 19:14:11 strtr wrote:
> I'm not sure whether you missed my point or are simple thinking out loud
> about unreachable code being a warning.
> My point was that the unreachable warning was wrong as there is no
> unreachable code.
Except that there _is_. You just can't see it.
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmail.com)'s article
> On Sunday 18 July 2010 17:36:58 strtr wrote:
> >
> > I don't agree with this bug report because of two reasons.
> > 1. Warnings are supposed to be warnings, not errors. If you want to see
> > those warnings you'll use -w.
> > What y
On Sunday 18 July 2010 17:36:58 strtr wrote:
>
> I don't agree with this bug report because of two reasons.
> 1. Warnings are supposed to be warnings, not errors. If you want to see
> those warnings you'll use -w.
> What you probably want is for the dmd to have a -!w flag instead (warnings
> by de
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmail.com)'s article
> On Sunday 18 July 2010 00:46:36 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > I'll file a bug report
> >
> > - Jonathan M Davis
> Wait. That's not the problem. Or at least, that's not the problem that needs
> to
> be reported. The problem is that we
On Sunday 18 July 2010 17:15:15 strtr wrote:
>
> I actually knew about unicode, but I mistakenly thought a char to be a code
> point (thus variable in size).
> Somehow I missed any documentation telling me otherwise.
> Now that I look for it it actually says:
> char |unsigned 8 bit UTF-8
>
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmail.com)'s article
> On Sunday 18 July 2010 10:59:21 strtr wrote:
> > I totally agree that putting a cast there is probably not really a solution
> > (or legal).
> > Warnings for all non-dchar types.
> > Is there anybody using foreach(c;chars) || foreac
Hello Mario,
That is, shall we produce "canonical" JSON text at the price of
efficiency.
Or, shall the perfect implementation of JSON objects as associative
arrays be dropped?
Or, what else?
Unless JSON requiers that the keys be in some order, the correct solution
is to make the check ord
On Sunday 18 July 2010 10:59:21 strtr wrote:
> I totally agree that putting a cast there is probably not really a solution
> (or legal).
> Warnings for all non-dchar types.
> Is there anybody using foreach(c;chars) || foreach(char c;chars) correctly
> (which couldn't be done with ubytes)?
As soon
On 07/18/2010 01:56 PM, bearophile wrote:
Charles Hixson:
extern (C) void dbdefine (char[] inStr, ref char[255] outStr);
I think C and D char[] don't go well together. D arrays are 2-word long
structs. Try again with something simpler, like a pointer and length.
Bye,
bearophile
Thanks,
Charles Hixson:
> extern (C) void dbdefine (char[] inStr, ref char[255] outStr);
I think C and D char[] don't go well together. D arrays are 2-word long
structs. Try again with something simpler, like a pointer and length.
Bye,
bearophile
Have a look at the unittest of std.json: the only non-trivial test is commented
out as "currently broken".
Smells like std.json has deep problems when it comes to real-world examples.
But then: running the unittest shows that the actual result is
{"goodbye":[true,"or",false,["test",42,{"nested":{
I'm trying to link a C routine to a D program, passing string
parameters, but I keep getting segmentation errors.
As you can see, these are simple test routines, so the names don't
reflect current status, but merely where I intend to arrive...but I've
hit severe roadblocks.
(FWIW, I've tried inc
Thanks again Jonathan, that was informative and helpful. I have enough info now
to
get what I want done without having to resort to using the standard C library.
According to Philippe's post, D's scanf (readf) should be included in the next
release. Excellent =D
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmail.com)'s article
> On Sunday 18 July 2010 06:16:09 strtr wrote:
> > I agree with the warning. A good warning would get people to read up on
> > UTF. And if you really want to have char you'll need to cast:
> > foreach(cast(char)c; chars)
> Actually, t
On Sunday 18 July 2010 06:16:09 strtr wrote:
> I agree with the warning. A good warning would get people to read up on
> UTF. And if you really want to have char you'll need to cast:
> foreach(cast(char)c; chars)
Actually, the cast would be totally unnecessary. Putting
foreach(char c; chars)
wou
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmail.com)'s article
> On Saturday 17 July 2010 23:01:28 strtr wrote:
> > >
> > > Cheated? I thought that you were trying to figure out why the code wasn't
> > > d oing
> > > what you expected it to be doing. So, of course I ran it.
> > > Though, it's mor
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmail.com)'s article
> On Sunday 18 July 2010 00:46:36 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > I'll file a bug report
> >
> > - Jonathan M Davis
> Wait. That's not the problem. Or at least, that's not the problem that needs
> to
> be reported. The problem is that we
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisp...@gmail.com)'s article
> On Sunday 18 July 2010 04:13:03 bearophile wrote:
> > Jonathan M Davis:
> > > You should pretty much never deal with each individual char or wchar in a
> > > string or wstring. Do the conversion to dchar or dstring if you want to
>
Andrei checked readf in a few days ago:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/1721
So, it should be in the next release (end of July/beginning of August?)
Would readf help you?
For files, there is also std.file.slurp if you know the way your file is
formatted:
http://digitalmars.com/
On Sunday 18 July 2010 04:13:03 bearophile wrote:
> Jonathan M Davis:
> > You should pretty much never deal with each individual char or wchar in a
> > string or wstring. Do the conversion to dchar or dstring if you want to
> > access individual characters. You can also use std.utf.stride() to
> >
Jonathan M Davis:
> You should pretty much never deal with each individual char or wchar in a
> string
> or wstring. Do the conversion to dchar or dstring if you want to access
> individual characters. You can also use std.utf.stride() to iterate over to
> the
> next code unit which starts a c
On Sunday 18 July 2010 02:58:59 Michael Koehmstedt wrote:
> I am doing this and it is throwing an exception.
>
> string d = readln( );
> int i = to!int( d );
>
> I tried
>
> string d = "50";
> int i = to!int( d );
>
> and that worked ok.
That would be because readln() was likely giving you mor
I am doing this and it is throwing an exception.
string d = readln( );
int i = to!int( d );
I tried
string d = "50";
int i = to!int( d );
and that worked ok.
On Sunday 18 July 2010 00:46:36 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I'll file a bug report
>
> - Jonathan M Davis
Wait. That's not the problem. Or at least, that's not the problem that needs to
be reported. The problem is that we're not compiling with -w. If you compile
with -w, then statements such as
On Sunday 18 July 2010 00:38:38 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Saturday 17 July 2010 22:52:21 strtr wrote:
> > I think I'll start subject tagging my posts: [D1/D2]
> > std.stdio in D1 doesn't mention a write function and feeding the writef
> > function an illegal UTF string will result in a UTF excep
On Saturday 17 July 2010 22:52:21 strtr wrote:
>
> I think I'll start subject tagging my posts: [D1/D2]
> std.stdio in D1 doesn't mention a write function and feeding the writef
> function an illegal UTF string will result in a UTF exception.
> With this information, what do you think the output s
On Saturday 17 July 2010 23:01:28 strtr wrote:
> >
> > Cheated? I thought that you were trying to figure out why the code wasn't
> > d oing
> > what you expected it to be doing. So, of course I ran it.
> > Though, it's more likely that I have an x86 emulator in my brain which
> > can run
> > dmd t
29 matches
Mail list logo
