On Friday, 5 April 2024 at 14:41:12 UTC, Carl Sturtivant wrote:
On Friday, 5 April 2024 at 07:37:20 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
pragma(msg, x) ?
No.
`__ctfeWrite(x)` is executed inside an executing function like
any other statement in it, and can have an argument `x`
computed during that e
On Friday, 5 April 2024 at 21:16:42 UTC, rkompass wrote:
In the first example the int's are converted to doubles (also
common type).
But they appear as int's because writeln does not write a
trailing .0.
But it doesn't work as you say! I even tried it on an older
version and got the same re
On Friday, 5 April 2024 at 16:05:20 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 03:18:09PM +, Salih Dincer via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Hi everyone,
Technically r1 and r2 are different types of range. Isn't it
inconsistent to chain both? If not, why is the char type
converted to int?
On Friday, 5 April 2024 at 16:05:20 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 03:18:09PM +, Salih Dincer via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Hi everyone,
Technically r1 and r2 are different types of range. Isn't it
inconsistent to chain both? If not, why is the char type
converted to int?
On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 03:18:09PM +, Salih Dincer via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Technically r1 and r2 are different types of range. Isn't it
> inconsistent to chain both? If not, why is the char type converted to
> int?
[...]
It's not inconsistent if there exists a commo
Hi everyone,
Technically r1 and r2 are different types of range. Isn't it
inconsistent to chain both? If not, why is the char type
converted to int?
```d
import std.stdio,
std.range;
void main() {
auto r1 = N!size_t(10, 1, 1);
auto r2 = N!real(15, .5, 10);
r1.chain(r2).writeln;
On Friday, 5 April 2024 at 07:37:20 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
pragma(msg, x) ?
No.
`__ctfeWrite(x)` is executed inside an executing function like
any other statement in it, and can have an argument `x` computed
during that execution.
It is defined to output the computed text `x` to stde
On Thursday, 4 April 2024 at 14:29:56 UTC, WhatMeWorry wrote:
Error: Unresolvable dependencies to package bindbc-loader:
bindbc-opengl 0.13.0 depends on bindbc-loader ~>0.3.0
bindbc-sdl 1.4.7 depends on bindbc-loader ~>1.1.0
Please update `bindbc-opengl` to `1.1.0`. I think it's
backwar
On Sunday, 24 March 2024 at 09:16:20 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
So, yes, you've run into a problem that it would be nice to
have a better fix for, but even if we could negate attributes
in general, there are good reasons to prefer to avoid
mass-applying attributes.
I don't see it as "mass-a
On Thursday, 4 April 2024 at 15:43:55 UTC, Carl Sturtivant wrote:
On Thursday, 4 April 2024 at 15:07:21 UTC, Richard (Rikki)
Andrew Cattermole wrote:
Ah yes, I forgot about that particular thing, doesn't see much
use as far as I'm aware.
It should be working though.
```D
enum X = computeX(
10 matches
Mail list logo
