On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 04:15:51 UTC, mw wrote:
What do you mean by saying "it's definitely not safe" here?
I mean: if I'm careful and know what I'm doing, e.g. remove all
the reference to any part of the `object` before call
core.memory.GC.free(object), is there still any inherit
On Tuesday, 22 September 2020 at 11:39:31 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 1:30 PM ShadoLight via
Digitalmars-d-learn < digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote:
This is not really "overriding", it is more akin to
"overloading"
No it is not overloading, overloading is w
On Friday, 18 September 2020 at 07:44:50 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 19:12:59 UTC, aberba wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 16:18:00 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 15:23:28 UTC, Severin Teona
wrote:
[...]
Use betterC, which is much better su
Wow, I have just received a link to this topic from my colleague.
Here is also another thread about druntime for MCUs:
https://forum.dlang.org/post/cwtkntyjhrwvpahfk...@forum.dlang.org
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 10:02:58 UTC, Dylan Graham
wrote:
On Friday, 18 September 2020 at 07:44:50 UTC, Dylan Graham
wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 19:12:59 UTC, aberba wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 16:18:00 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 15:23:28 UT
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 00:06:38 UTC, DlangUser38
wrote:
Hmm, why would `b` have longer lifetime? Isn't the lifetime of
`b` throughout `bar`?
The following analysis might be wrong but I think that `scope`
as a **member** function attribute is not supposed to be used
as that is not
On 23.09.20 02:06, DlangUser38 wrote:
The following analysis might be wrong but I think that `scope` as a
**member** function attribute is not supposed to be used as that is not
even documented.
It's documented here:
https://dlang.org/spec/memory-safe-d.html#scope-return-params
Quote: "[`scop
On Tuesday, 22 September 2020 at 21:55:51 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 September 2020 at 09:32:13 UTC, drathier wrote:
What's the obvious way to put a timeout around a function
call? I'm thinking a 5 or 30 second timeout, and I'm expecting
it to pretty much never time out.
You have s
There are really two questions here, one that I intended to ask
and one that came out while I was trying to figure out the
answer. Consider this simple code:
---
module foo;
struct Foo
{
private int _x;
int x() const
{
return _x;
}
}
---
If I have an instance of Foo outside of th
I have some similar functions:
void register(C: IFoo)()
{
_insert!C();
}
void register(C)() if (behavesLikeFoo!C)
{
_insert!C();
}
There are more overloads with parameters so I want to merge them
void register(C, ARGS...)(ARGS args) if (behavesLikeFoo!C ||
isInstanceOf!(C, IFoo))
{
_in
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:37:45 UTC, wjoe wrote:
I have some similar functions:
void register(C: IFoo)()
{
_insert!C();
}
void register(C)() if (behavesLikeFoo!C)
{
_insert!C();
}
There are more overloads with parameters so I want to merge them
void register(C, ARGS...)(ARGS a
Try this:
interface I {}
class C : I {}
class D {}
struct S {}
pragma(msg, is(C : I)); // true
pragma(msg, is(D : I)); // false
pragma(msg, is(S : I)); // false
So probably what you want is something like this:
void register(C, ARG
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:50:28 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Try this:
interface I {}
class C : I {}
class D {}
struct S {}
pragma(msg, is(C : I)); // true
pragma(msg, is(D : I)); // false
pragma(msg, is(S : I)); // false
So probabl
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:49:28 UTC, data pulverizer
wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:37:45 UTC, wjoe wrote:
[...]
A class at compile time is it's own static type, OOP
polymorphism is a runtime feature not compile time. You have to
write your own traits for specific o
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:56:33 UTC, wjoe wrote:
It doesn't occur to me that the compiler doesn't know at
compile time that
interface IFoo{}
class Foo: IFoo {}
class Foo implements interface IFoo.
Didn't think that the compiler didn't know but wasn't aware that
you could use t
On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 07:08:47PM +, data pulverizer via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:56:33 UTC, wjoe wrote:
> >
> > It doesn't occur to me that the compiler doesn't know at compile
> > time that
> >
> > interface IFoo{}
> > class Foo: IFoo {}
> >
> >
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:38:53 UTC, 60rntogo wrote:
There are really two questions here, one that I intended to ask
and one that came out while I was trying to figure out the
answer. Consider this simple code:
[...]
Yeah, you can make a property setter:
private void x(int newVa
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 19:08:47 UTC, data pulverizer
wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:56:33 UTC, wjoe wrote:
[...]
Didn't think that the compiler didn't know but wasn't aware
that you could use that information to statically dispatch. My
mistake, I'll shut up now!
A
On 9/23/20 2:38 PM, 60rntogo wrote:
So my questions are:
1. Can I achieve my original goal of being able to refer to _x by one
name, so that I have read only access from outside the module and
read/write access from inside?
I would guess no. You have to use different names.
2. Is the behavi
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 19:27:13 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
This is a bug in the language.
🤯😆
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 19:26:43 UTC, aliak wrote:
Yeah, you can make a property setter:
private void x(int newValue) { _x = newValue }
I'm aware of this, but it does not achieve what I asked for. It
only allows me to assign to _x, it doesn't give me a reference to
x, so I cannot
On Monday, 21 September 2020 at 11:14:06 UTC, Виталий Фадеев
wrote:
How to implement fastcall ?
( stdcall is calling convention for pass function arguments via
registers )
Hypothesis: it is possible what LLVM + Link Time Optimization
does by this way.
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 19:50:13 UTC, Denis Feklushkin
wrote:
On Monday, 21 September 2020 at 11:14:06 UTC, Виталий Фадеев
wrote:
How to implement fastcall ?
( stdcall is calling convention for pass function arguments
via registers )
Hypothesis: it is possible what LLVM + Link Time
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 17:33:50 UTC, drathier wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 September 2020 at 21:55:51 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
[...]
Blocking is perfectly fine. I'm wondering if I need things to
be shared now or something? Not used to programming with
threads. Adding a shared modifier rec
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 19:16:13 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Of course the compiler knows. And of course it can use this
information for static dispatch. That's why D is so awesome at
metaprogramming. ;-)
What the compiler *doesn't* know is whether a variable of some
supertype of Foo
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 19:27:13 UTC, wjoe wrote:
Appologies if you took offense. Your replies are very much
appreciated.
No offense taken.
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 20:19:04 UTC, data pulverizer
wrote:
This has prompted me to write a data structure that I thought
would be impossible until now. [...SNIP...]
Here is the function with the correct template constraint:
```
auto makeChain(Args...)(Args args)
if(Args.length > 2
On 9/23/20 1:19 PM, Imperatorn wrote:
> No. You should not share anything. Personally I would just send a
> message to request termination or use the solution provided with timeout.
std.concurrency does not allow "mutable thread-local data"; so one needs
to cast to shared (assuming copying is n
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 20:19:04 UTC, data pulverizer
wrote:
This has prompted me to write a data structure that I thought
would be impossible until now
False alarm:
```
writeln("typeof(x.next): ", typeof(x.next).stringof);
```
gives:
```
typeof(x.next): const(Node)
```
Oh wel
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 20:44:51 UTC, Ali Çehreli
wrote:
On 9/23/20 1:19 PM, Imperatorn wrote:
> [...]
send a
> [...]
with timeout.
[...]
Sorry, I can't see the problem. Could you be more specific about
what you want to achieve?
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 20:54:51 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 20:44:51 UTC, Ali Çehreli
wrote:
On 9/23/20 1:19 PM, Imperatorn wrote:
> [...]
send a
> [...]
with timeout.
[...]
Sorry, I can't see the problem. Could you be more specific
about what you w
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 04:15:51 UTC, mw wrote:
On Saturday, 27 October 2012 at 01:08:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Yes. But using core.memory.GC.free is unsafe for the same
reasons that delete is. It's just that it's a druntime
function instead of a part of the language, so it's l
On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 18:37:45 UTC, wjoe wrote:
I have some similar functions:
void register(C: IFoo)()
{
_insert!C();
}
void register(C)() if (behavesLikeFoo!C)
{
_insert!C();
}
There are more overloads with parameters so I want to merge them
void register(C, ARGS...)(ARGS a
33 matches
Mail list logo
