On Thursday, 26 October 2017 at 04:34:36 UTC, Ky-Anh Huynh wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to distribute binaries (compiled from Dlang sources)
to my servers and users. This really helps end users because
they don't need to rebuild things with custom dmd/dub setup.
However, distributing things require th
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 at 04:34:36 UTC, Ky-Anh Huynh wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to distribute binaries (compiled from Dlang sources)
to my servers and users. This really helps end users because
they don't need to rebuild things with custom dmd/dub setup.
However, distributing things require th
Hi,
I'd like to distribute binaries (compiled from Dlang sources) to
my servers and users. This really helps end users because they
don't need to rebuild things with custom dmd/dub setup. However,
distributing things require them to `trust` me, and this is
another thing I want to avoid.
Is
On Sunday, 18 January 2015 at 00:51:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
On Saturday, 17 January 2015 at 16:55:42 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Saturday, 17 January 2015 at 14:37:00 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
On Saturday, 17 January 2015 at 13:47:39 UTC, Marc Schütz
wrote:
[...]
I agree that it would be
On Sunday, 18 January 2015 at 16:00:32 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Sunday, 18 January 2015 at 11:21:52 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
It's not different, and if you're still doing the O_EXCL open
afterwards, it's safe. I just assumed you were going to use
the generated filename without a further check. Thi
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 20:04:47 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 19:50:31 UTC, SrMordred wrote:
so why this line resolves to false?
Because it is illegal to put a statement or declaration inside
__traits(compiles). sorry, I should have said that before...
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 19:50:31 UTC, SrMordred wrote:
so why this line resolves to false?
Because it is illegal to put a statement or declaration inside
__traits(compiles). sorry, I should have said that before... even
though the mixin can be legal in another context, it won't be in
The semicolon there indicates it is a complete statement that
does nothing, and that's no error.
so why this line resolves to false?
void F(){}
pragma(msg, __traits( compiles, mixin("F();") ) );//false
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 19:25:01 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 19:12:02 UTC, SrMordred wrote:
Maybe i´m tired already, but whats wrong here:
pragma(msg, __traits( compiles, mixin("int x") ) );
You are missing a ;
The mixin must compile as a full thing in
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 19:21:27 UTC, SrMordred wrote:
mixin( "T();" ); Error: `structliteral` has no effect in
expression `T()`
The semicolon there indicates it is a complete statement that
does nothing, and that's no error.
If there's no ;, it is just an expression that must be so
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 19:12:02 UTC, SrMordred wrote:
Maybe i´m tired already, but whats wrong here:
pragma(msg, __traits( compiles, mixin("int x") ) );
//output: false
Or the original case I found:
struct T{}
pragma(msg, __traits( compiles, T() ) ); //true
pragma(msg, __traits( co
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 19:12:02 UTC, SrMordred wrote:
Maybe i´m tired already, but whats wrong here:
pragma(msg, __traits( compiles, mixin("int x") ) );
You are missing a ;
The mixin must compile as a full thing in context. Variable
declarations need the ; to be complete.
Maybe i´m tired already, but whats wrong here:
pragma(msg, __traits( compiles, mixin("int x") ) );
//output: false
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 10:47:56 UTC, Oleg B wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 04:30:12 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
If I wrote `array[5..7] of ...` I get array that can be indexed
by `5`, `6` and `7`, right? It means that array have 3
elements. If A=5, B=7 then length of array is B-A+1
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 03:36:54 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
I'd suggest just trying it and seeing if the functions return
what you expect.
Unfortunately they returns unexpected codes. Otherwise I wouldn't
post question here. I go here then I have no idea to resolve
problem.
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 04:30:12 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 03:12:56 UTC, Oleg B wrote:
2. `array[A..B] of TFoo` is `TFoo[B-A+1]` (static array)
No A-B. In Pascal the upper bound of a range (like here but i'm
not sure this i called like that in the grammar
On Tuesday, October 24, 2017 16:59:31 Arun Chandrasekaran via Digitalmars-d-
learn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 24 October 2017 at 16:18:03 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 10:02:11AM +, Arun Chandrasekaran
> >
> > via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> >> On Monday, 23 October 2017 at 18:0
17 matches
Mail list logo