On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 09:50:41 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 8/2/2017 2:24 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> And there was me being a great fan of AST macros in those languages that have
>> them.
>
> There are many who share your views here :-)

Well d have a goto statement despite having a famous argument against goto statments, so it not like d always follows the rules.

Regardless, what impress me the most is the part where it came be used to enforce coding standards at compile time. Which I am trying to look if it's possible with d and sadly no luck.

Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does?

Alex

On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 13:50:49 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>
> Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does?
>
> Alex

Like the ability to run dscanner at compile-time?
https://github.com/dlang-community/D-Scanner

On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 14:08:21 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
> On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 13:50:49 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>>
>> Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does?
>>
>> Alex
>
> Like the ability to run dscanner at compile-time?
> https://github.com/dlang-community/D-Scanner

...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper.

On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
> ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper.

The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D already does what the paper proposes.

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
> On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>> ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper.
>
> The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D already does what the paper proposes.
Page 2:

"Enable writing
compiler-enforced
patterns for any purpose:
coding standards
(e.g., many
Core Guidelines
“enforce” rules)
"

Yes, it does, right there. Are you reading the same paper that I am?

On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote:
> On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>>> ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper.
>>
>> The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D already does what the paper proposes.
> Page 2:
> 
> "Enable writing
> compiler-enforced
> patterns for any purpose:
> coding standards
> (e.g., many
> Core Guidelines
> “enforce” rules)
> "
> 
> Yes, it does, right there. Are you reading the same paper that I am?

On 02.08.2017 15:50, 12345swordy wrote:
>   > Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom
> coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does?

How would you use the proposed features to implement @safe or @nogc within C++?

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote:
>> On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>>>> ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper.
>>>
>>> The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D already does what the paper proposes.
>> Page 2:
>> 
>> "Enable writing
>> compiler-enforced
>> patterns for any purpose:
>> coding standards
>> (e.g., many
>> Core Guidelines
>> “enforce” rules)
>> "
>> 
>> Yes, it does, right there. Are you reading the same paper that I am?
>
> On 02.08.2017 15:50, 12345swordy wrote:
>>   > Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom
>> coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does?
>
> How would you use the proposed features to implement @safe or @nogc within C++?

I am not interested in arguing about what I said or I didn't said. Regardless what you asking is ridiculous, as 1.) there is no gc exist in c++ in the first place 2.)it's still a concept at this point of time which may be rejected in the future.

On 03.08.2017 21:28, 12345swordy wrote:
> On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>>>>> ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper.
>>>>
>>>> The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D already does what the paper proposes.
>>> Page 2:
>>>
>>> "Enable writing
>>> compiler-enforced
>>> patterns for any purpose:
>>> coding standards
>>> (e.g., many
>>> Core Guidelines
>>> “enforce” rules)
>>> "
>>>
>>> Yes, it does, right there. Are you reading the same paper that I am?
>>
>> On 02.08.2017 15:50, 12345swordy wrote:
>>>   > Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom
>>> coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does?
>>
>> How would you use the proposed features to implement @safe or @nogc within C++?
> 
> I am not interested in arguing about what I said or I didn't said. 

I don't understand the relevance of this sentence.

> Regardless what you asking is ridiculous, as 1.) there is no gc exist in c++ in the first place
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boehm_garbage_collector

> 2.)it's still a concept at this point of time which may be rejected in the future.

How does that make my question ridiculous?

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:45:12 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 03.08.2017 21:28, 12345swordy wrote:
>> On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>> On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> On 02.08.2017 15:50, 12345swordy wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> How would you use the proposed features to implement @safe or @nogc within C++?
>> 
>> I am not interested in arguing about what I said or I didn't said.
>
> I don't understand the relevance of this sentence.
>
>> Regardless what you asking is ridiculous, as 1.) there is no gc exist in c++ in the first place
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boehm_garbage_collector
>
>> 2.)it's still a concept at this point of time which may be rejected in the future.
>
> How does that make my question ridiculous?
You are splinting hairs here. The gc that you linked is a third party library, that is not the same as having it built into the language itself. Clear difference.

Alex

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 19:02:17 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 03.08.2017 20:32, 12345swordy wrote:
>> On Thursday, 3 August 2017 at 10:43:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 at 20:28:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>>>> ...No? I was referring to the c++ proposal paper.
>>>
>>> The paper doesn't propose to enforce coding standards to the point you want. D already does what the paper proposes.
>> Page 2:
>> 
>> "Enable writing
>> compiler-enforced
>> patterns for any purpose:
>> coding standards
>> (e.g., many
>> Core Guidelines
>> “enforce” rules)
>> "
>> 
>> Yes, it does, right there. Are you reading the same paper that I am?
>
> On 02.08.2017 15:50, 12345swordy wrote:
>>   > Is it to much to ask for d developers to provide a way to enforce custom
>> coding standards in a similar fashion that @nogc and @safe does?
>
> How would you use the proposed features to implement @safe or @nogc within C++?

I think you misread him.  He wants to enforce custom coding standards in D similar to how that proposal would allow, and he's comparing it to how D does it with attributes for @safe and @nogc, but he's not asking about @safe and @nogc specifically.  Presumably, he's wondering if he can apply other attributes in D that could be used to enforce coding standards similar to the ones that C++ proposal enables.