February 16, 2007
Small typo in function.html:

syncrhonized
February 16, 2007
Thanks
February 16, 2007
> This seems a sensible change. Version.Major.Minor is very common and very intuitive. Version for code incompatible changes, Major for new additions to the spec, minor for bug fixes. You can keep your current numbering scheme for minor ticks. Thus 1.0.001, 1.0.002, etc. As Miles suggests, you could even retroactively bump the new "major" version to reflect the new features (mixins and compile time functions).

votes++
February 16, 2007
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 04:04:37 -0500, Lionello Lunesu <lio@lunesu.remove.com> wrote:

> Small typo in function.html:
>
> syncrhonized

ugh, I mess it up every time; I hate this word. lock() much nicer.
February 16, 2007
Walter Bright wrote:
> Compile time function execution! (Please discuss in the corresponding thread in digitalmars.D)
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
> 
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.006.zip

Now that's truly spectacular.
Metaprogramming is dead. Long live metaprogramming!
How on Mars did you do it that fast?
February 16, 2007
Walter Bright wrote:
> Compile time function execution! (Please discuss in the corresponding thread in digitalmars.D)
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
> 
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.006.zip

Wow.  This is strange territory to be traveling in.  But the more I look at it, the more sense it makes.

I've been tinkering around in template space a lot lately - this should help a bunch.  Thanks Walter!

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo
February 16, 2007
== Quote from Frits van Bommel (fvbommel@REMwOVExCAPSs.nl)'s article
> Reiner Pope wrote:
> > Walter Bright wrote:
> >> Compile time function execution! (Please discuss in the corresponding
> >> thread in digitalmars.D)
> >>
> >> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
> >>
> >> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.006.zip
> >
> > The interpretation section is missing from function.html in the docs.
> Yes, it seems the site hasn't been updated yet. And not just that page, the URL referenced in http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=960 (listed as fixed) doesn't seem to be updated either.

The website version of future.html looks fixed to me. That's why I marked it as "fixed". Is your browser using a cached version of that page?

> They're provided in the zip though (dmd/html/d/function.html and
> dmd/html/d/future.html).

February 16, 2007
jcc7 wrote:
> == Quote from Frits van Bommel (fvbommel@REMwOVExCAPSs.nl)'s article
>> Reiner Pope wrote:
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> Compile time function execution! (Please discuss in the corresponding
>>>> thread in digitalmars.D)
>>>>
>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>>>>
>>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.006.zip
>>> The interpretation section is missing from function.html in the docs.
>> Yes, it seems the site hasn't been updated yet. And not just that page,
>> the URL referenced in http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=960
>> (listed as fixed) doesn't seem to be updated either.
> 
> The website version of future.html looks fixed to me. That's why I marked it as
> "fixed". Is your browser using a cached version of that page?

Judging by the post Walter made just before mine, it seems he fixed it between the time I checked and the time I I clicked 'send'...
February 16, 2007
Pragma wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Compile time function execution! (Please discuss in the corresponding
>> thread in digitalmars.D)
>>
>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>>
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.006.zip
> 
> Wow.  This is strange territory to be traveling in.  But the more I look at it, the more sense it makes.
> 
> I've been tinkering around in template space a lot lately - this should help a bunch.  Thanks Walter!
> 

You know, one year on mars has 687 days, so one day on earth is two days on mars. Walter had twice the time ;)
February 16, 2007
== Quote from Frits van Bommel (fvbommel@REMwOVExCAPSs.nl)'s article
> jcc7 wrote:
> > == Quote from Frits van Bommel (fvbommel@REMwOVExCAPSs.nl)'s article
> >> Yes, it seems the site hasn't been updated yet. And not just that
> >> the URL referenced in http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=960
> >> (listed as fixed) doesn't seem to be updated either.
> >
> > The website version of future.html looks fixed to me. That's why I > > marked
it as "fixed". Is your browser using a cached version of
> > that page?
> Judging by the post Walter made just before mine, it seems he fixed it between the time I checked and the time I I clicked 'send'...

Oh. Sorry, I guess I was caught in a timewarp.