It's been a little while since I've been back. Got burned out and stuff. Currently watching all the Dconf 2014 videos (although I never finished the 2013 ones).

 So, I don't suppose there's a short quick & dirty summary of what's happened in the last 18 months?

 Also somewhat curious if anyone took my BitArray updates and got them implemented in phobos or not. Quite annoying I still haven't gotten a full understanding of GitHub yet, and at this rate probably won't.

On Tuesday, 5 August 2014 at 09:30:45 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
>  It's been a little while since I've been back. Got burned out and stuff. Currently watching all the Dconf 2014 videos (although I never finished the 2013 ones).
>
>  So, I don't suppose there's a short quick & dirty summary of what's happened in the last 18 months?

Big things that directly come to my mind : DDMD, shared libraries, @nogc

>  Also somewhat curious if anyone took my BitArray updates and got them implemented in phobos or not. Quite annoying I still haven't gotten a full understanding of GitHub yet, and at this rate probably won't.

Check commit history https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/commits/master/std/bitmanip.d ;)

On Tuesday, 5 August 2014 at 09:30:45 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
>  So, I don't suppose there's a short quick & dirty summary of what's happened in the last 18 months?

Too much to list.

http://dlang.org/changelog.html

On Tuesday, 5 August 2014 at 09:37:10 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> Check commit history

 It's confusing. Glancing at code snippets the code doesn't look like mine. I'll just have to assume my work was junked.

On Tuesday, 5 August 2014 at 09:47:16 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> On Tuesday, 5 August 2014 at 09:37:10 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>> Check commit history
>
>  It's confusing. Glancing at code snippets the code doesn't look like mine. I'll just have to assume my work was junked.

I have meant that I have no idea what changes you are speaking about and change list for std.bitmanip is too long to look through unless you know exactly what to look for :(

On Tuesday, 5 August 2014 at 09:52:13 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> I have meant that I have no idea what changes you are speaking about and change list for std.bitmanip is too long to look through unless you know exactly what to look for :(

 I remember i almost re-wrote the entire thing from scratch, and it had so many bug fixes it was crazy, something like 30 pulls and bug numbers were referenced; Not just for BitArray but for the BitManip template as well.

 Trust me, it would be recognizable, and long too. I think at one point Andre or Walter wanted it broken down to simpler and fewer fixes so they are more modularized, and to do so would be so counter productive since it was basically an entire rewrite.

 Worse is the error of why it wouldn't merge with phobos back in 2012/2013... It was like 13 newlines didn't match up so it didn't know how to merge it.... 13 whitespaces... I don't know...

On Tuesday, 5 August 2014 at 09:30:45 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
>
>  So, I don't suppose there's a short quick & dirty summary of what's happened in the last 18 months?
>
The bikeshed is now a very pleasing red, but some people think it should be a different shade of red and the rest think it should be green.

 Well it looks like i got a lot of work ahead of me. Is Ali's online book good and up-to-date on D's current behavior as well as it's features?

 I'll look over the bugzilla listing of stuff for BitManip and see if i can't help with that library once more, but so far personal experience trying to contribute to phobos & D has been a sub-par experience. Probably due to not being familiar with Git or GitHub.


 At the DConf2014 Walter Bright commented on using LZW compression on name mangling to manage template expansion to keep it from going overboard. Has anyone done that? If not i could do that...

 So I guess I need to ask: Should I try to resume work on the BitManip library? (So far it seems none of my code has been integrated to phobos)

 Assuming I do, should I try to fix lots of small bugs and make smaller pulls or should I try to do several at once? When I re-wrote the BitArray I personally think it is an improvement in many ways, and being a re-write you can't just do bug #xxxx and then bug #xxxx and then bug... etc etc.

 Also to ask, how many people tried out the rewrite I proposed, and do they think it was actually an improvement for ease of use, speed, fewer bugs, etc?

On Thursday, 7 August 2014 at 01:40:13 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
>  So I guess I need to ask: Should I try to resume work on the BitManip library? (So far it seems none of my code has been integrated to phobos)
>
>  Assuming I do, should I try to fix lots of small bugs and make smaller pulls or should I try to do several at once? When I re-wrote the BitArray I personally think it is an improvement in many ways, and being a re-write you can't just do bug #xxxx and then bug #xxxx and then bug... etc etc.
>
>  Also to ask, how many people tried out the rewrite I proposed, and do they think it was actually an improvement for ease of use, speed, fewer bugs, etc?

I haven't looked at your rewrite, but from what I've seen the current implementation is indeed very awkward and full of bugs. There were also some discussions about the behaviour on resizing with respect to stomping, IIRC. This seems to imply that not even the semantics are completely clear. I guess a complete rewrite would be appropriate in such a situation.