On Tuesday, 25 February 2014 at 07:59:33 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 14:14:43 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 13:56:01 UTC, Remo wrote:
Hi,
right now I am truing to figure out how the constructors
behave in D2.
Question 1: why it is not
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 14:14:43 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 13:56:01 UTC, Remo wrote:
Hi,
right now I am truing to figure out how the constructors
behave in D2.
Question 1: why it is not possible to create custom ctor for
struct?
The design of D reli
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 19:41:57 UTC, Remo wrote:
For Vector example this works pretty well this way.
But my main problem is more complicated.
extern(C) int init(ref CWrapper p);
extern(C) void free(ref CWrapper p);
struct CWrapper
{
//some data that must be the same at C side.
Data
On Tuesday, 25 February 2014 at 06:06:22 UTC, Jesse Phillips
wrote:
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 20:35:54 UTC, Remo wrote:
This looks like D2 is still in Beta stadium and not really
ready for production use !?
If someone thinks that C++ was production ready in 1998, just go
and try a C++ co
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 20:35:54 UTC, Remo wrote:
This looks like D2 is still in Beta stadium and not really
ready for production use !?
I believe it is ready for production, but you can't expect it to
be ready in all cases. Mostly its lack of readiness isn't because
of the language th
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 23:34:51 UTC, Remo wrote:
Where I can find more info about 'D's move semantics'?
Apparently it is not the same as rvalue reference and move
semantics in C++11 ?
Here is the place I know of:
http://dconf.org/2013/talks/cehreli.html
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 21:06:03 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 17:15:10 UTC, Remo wrote:
So what is proper/best way to mimic default constructor for
struct ?
Honestly, you can't, and you shouldn't try either. There "used"
to be the static opCall that allowed:
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 17:15:10 UTC, Remo wrote:
So what is proper/best way to mimic default constructor for
struct ?
Honestly, you can't, and you shouldn't try either. There "used"
to be the static opCall that allowed:
auto a = T();
But:
a) This is being phased out: If T h
Also please take a look at those:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7066
There may be some others I've missed; the sheer amount and
unresolved state is terrifying.
IMHO Issue 7066 is not a bug but a feature.
Of course it could be handled i a bit more safe way.
This looks like
Fortunately?
Yes I think it is. Of course it could be made a more safe in some
way.
I think the big advantage of D is that it has 'bridge' to C and
C++.
This way it appears to be easy to port some C++ code to D.
And it appears to be easy to interconnect C++ and D code. (via
Dll for example)
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 17:15:10 UTC, Remo wrote:
Well fortunately it seems to be possible to override init
property.
Fortunately? I think not. It's an abomination that, IMO, has to
be annihilated. Recently Andrei suggested adding more explicit
semantics to .init that may give some le
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 14:14:43 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 13:56:01 UTC, Remo wrote:
Hi,
right now I am truing to figure out how the constructors
behave in D2.
Question 1: why it is not possible to create custom ctor for
struct?
The design of D reli
On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 13:56:01 UTC, Remo wrote:
Hi,
right now I am truing to figure out how the constructors behave
in D2.
Question 1: why it is not possible to create custom ctor for
struct?
The design of D relies on the fact that every type has a T.init
property that is known t
Hi,
right now I am truing to figure out how the constructors behave
in D2.
Question 1: why it is not possible to create custom ctor for
struct?
I know this is not really necessary because you can initialize
fields like this.
struct S{ int i = 1; }
But this is a big problem if one tries to
14 matches
Mail list logo
