October 14, 2008
Kyle Furlong schrieb:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> We seem to have reached a dead end on finding a significantly better
>> alternative than foo!(bar).
>>
>> All is not lost, though. Andrei is working on an emacs module that
>> will parse D code and replace foo!(bar) with foo«bar» for display only
>> when the editor is in D mode, the underlying text will still be
>> foo!(bar). (This doesn't affect D at all, only its display in Emacs.)
>>
>> Also, we're going to try using ! for single argument syntax, as in:
>>
>> foo!bar  is same as   foo!(bar)
>> foo!10   is same as   foo!(10)
>>
>> etc. 0 arguments or more than 1 argument or arguments that are more than one token long will still require !( ). We'll see how that works. I think it looks rather nice.
> 
> Is it just me or is foo!bar uglier than foo!(bar)? Maybe I'm just used
> to the tried and true syntax.

Seconded.
October 14, 2008
Kyle Furlong wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> We seem to have reached a dead end on finding a significantly better alternative than foo!(bar).
>>
>> All is not lost, though. Andrei is working on an emacs module that will parse D code and replace foo!(bar) with foo«bar» for display only when the editor is in D mode, the underlying text will still be foo!(bar). (This doesn't affect D at all, only its display in Emacs.)
>>
>> Also, we're going to try using ! for single argument syntax, as in:
>>
>> foo!bar  is same as   foo!(bar)
>> foo!10   is same as   foo!(10)
>>
>> etc. 0 arguments or more than 1 argument or arguments that are more than one token long will still require !( ). We'll see how that works. I think it looks rather nice.
> 
> Is it just me or is foo!bar uglier than foo!(bar)? Maybe I'm just used to the tried and true syntax.

Uglier and more ambiguous.
October 14, 2008
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:48 AM, Frank Benoit <keinfarbton@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Kyle Furlong schrieb:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> We seem to have reached a dead end on finding a significantly better
>>> alternative than foo!(bar).
>>>
>>> All is not lost, though. Andrei is working on an emacs module that
>>> will parse D code and replace foo!(bar) with foo«bar» for display only
>>> when the editor is in D mode, the underlying text will still be
>>> foo!(bar). (This doesn't affect D at all, only its display in Emacs.)
>>>
>>> Also, we're going to try using ! for single argument syntax, as in:
>>>
>>> foo!bar  is same as   foo!(bar)
>>> foo!10   is same as   foo!(10)
>>>
>>> etc. 0 arguments or more than 1 argument or arguments that are more than one token long will still require !( ). We'll see how that works. I think it looks rather nice.
>>
>> Is it just me or is foo!bar uglier than foo!(bar)? Maybe I'm just used
>> to the tried and true syntax.
>
> Seconded.

Thirded, though it does look a bit better with a monospace font.  In the proportional font used by gmail, it just shrinks to way to small and hard to see.

--bb
October 16, 2008
Sergey Gromov wrote:
> Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:18:35 +0800,
> KennyTM~ wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> KennyTM~ wrote:
>>>> But will be compiler accept T«x» if I directly feed it into the compiler?
>>> No.
>>>
>>>> It's no good if what you see cannot be what you type.
>>> The compiler doesn't accept colored text either, but that doesn't impair the usefulness of an editor that displays it that way.
>> Because you can't type color, but you can type « and ».
> 
> You can type runes either.  Let's use Fehu for function types and literals!

Now that's real arcana!! There really should be a programming language that looked magic scrolls!

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Developer, MSc. in CS/E graduate
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
October 16, 2008
Robert Fraser wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>  I just told Walter even his code looks good now :o).
> 
> It can replace "goto" with scenes from the Looney Toons?

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Seriously, I gave a good laugh with that one ;D

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Developer, MSc. in CS/E graduate
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
October 16, 2008
Christopher Wright wrote:
> Dave wrote:
>> "Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message news:gcqvfr$1k6i$1@digitalmars.com...
>>> One of the original guiding principles of D is that it be easy to parse. There were a number of valid reasons for this, not just lazyness.
>>>
>>> Plus, I'm no compiler expert, but I think I rememebr hearing somewhere that overloadng <> to be usable for both comparisons and grouping would require non-context-free grammar. That would be a major increase in D's parsing complexity. C++ grammer is definately not context-free, that's why it can get away with it. Not sure about C# or Java, but I've been under the impression those aren't context-free either.
>>>
>>
>> I can see your point and to a point I think it is a valid concern.
>>
>> But, most users could care less about that stuff IMO. Abstraction from what a compiler does is why we use higher-level languages in the first place <g>
> 
> C++ is much more popular than D, but I haven't found an IDE for it that has a significant advantage over Descent. Many users care a fair bit about IDEs -- I would, if I didn't work over ssh pretty much of the time.

Actually, CDT seems to have advanced quite a lot in its versions 3 and 4 at least in terms of semantic features (code completion, open declaration, open type, and even refactoring). Last time I checked it, it seemed quite better than VC++ 2005 (except perhaps in the area of debugging).

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Developer, MSc. in CS/E graduate
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
October 18, 2008
That's looking very nice. Esp. the boolean expressions!

- Bent

October 18, 2008
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 7:40 AM, Bent Rasmussen <IncredibleShrinkingSphere@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's looking very nice. Esp. the boolean expressions!

ERROR: Vote ignored for lack of context.

If you're going to go to the trouble to agree to something, you might as well quote what it is that you're agreeing to. :-)

--bb
Next ›   Last »
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home