Thread overview | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
June 04, 2010 D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Someone asked on http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/cb14j/compiletime_function_execution_in_d/: "A question about D that's been bugging me: why aren't there any D examples at the language shootout site?" I didn't know what to answer. I seem to recall there were submissions, am I wrong? Andrei |
June 04, 2010 Re: D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrei Alexandrescu | Andrei Alexandrescu:
> Someone asked on http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/cb14j/compiletime_function_execution_in_d/:
>
> "A question about D that's been bugging me: why aren't there any D examples at the language shootout site?"
The maintainer of that site is uninterested in D. Don't waste your time on this.
Bye,
bearophile
|
June 04, 2010 Re: D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrei Alexandrescu | Andrei Alexandrescu:
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/cb14j/compiletime_function_execution_in_d/:
Isn't the usage of "static" to run compile-time functions a bad practice? Time ago I have filed a bug about something related.
Bye,
bearophile
|
June 04, 2010 Re: D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to bearophile | == Quote from bearophile (bearophileHUGS@lycos.com)'s article > Andrei Alexandrescu: > > Someone asked on > > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/cb14j/compiletime_functio n_execution_in_d/: > > > > "A question about D that's been bugging me: why aren't there any D examples at the language shootout site?" > The maintainer of that site is uninterested in D. Don't waste your time on this. > Bye, > bearophile That seems like a good summary to me. Here's a relevant post: http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php? art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=103383 |
June 04, 2010 Re: D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to bearophile | On 04/06/2010 22:32, bearophile wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/cb14j/compiletime_function_execution_in_d/:
>
> Isn't the usage of "static" to run compile-time functions a bad practice? Time ago I have filed a bug about something related.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile
Have the same feeling. Question remains is > What instead?
/ctfe/ int r = fact(100);
Guess you know about Walter's allergic reactions regarding the introduction of a new keyword. :)
nevertheless IMHO a
compile {
int r = fact(100): // would be smart
}
bjoern
|
June 04, 2010 Re: D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrei Alexandrescu | On 04/06/10 21:07, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Someone asked on
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/cb14j/compiletime_function_execution_in_d/:
>
>
> "A question about D that's been bugging me: why aren't there any D
> examples at the language shootout site?"
>
> I didn't know what to answer. I seem to recall there were submissions,
> am I wrong?
>
>
> Andrei
D used to be on there, it was removed due to the lack of native x86-64 support when the benchmark was updated to an x86-64 box. I seem to recall them saying until this was sorted D wasn't getting its place on there.
Robert
|
June 04, 2010 Re: D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to BLS | BLS:
> Have the same feeling. Question remains is > What instead?
> /ctfe/ int r = fact(100);
In D2 I use enum:
enum int r = fact(100);
(I think I have not yet understood of the full meaning given by Walter to "static" for variables in D).
Bye,
bearophile
|
June 04, 2010 Re: D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Robert Clipsham | Robert Clipsham:
> D used to be on there, it was removed due to the lack of native x86-64 support when the benchmark was updated to an x86-64 box. I seem to recall them saying until this was sorted D wasn't getting its place on there.
He will probably not add D even if dmd becomes 64 bit. LDC is already working on 64 bit.
Bye,
bearophile
|
June 05, 2010 Re: D at shootout.alioth.debian.org | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to bearophile | Fri, 04 Jun 2010 18:31:31 -0400, bearophile wrote:
> Robert Clipsham:
>> D used to be on there, it was removed due to the lack of native x86-64 support when the benchmark was updated to an x86-64 box. I seem to recall them saying until this was sorted D wasn't getting its place on there.
>
> He will probably not add D even if dmd becomes 64 bit. LDC is already working on 64 bit.
You sound a bit pessimistic here, son. Why don't you just say it directly if you think the author is a dickhead? I don't think he is. I think it's reasonable to wait for official 64-bit packages for the toolchain. It's totally unreasonable to expect him to compile a custom version of the toolchain and spend hours on it every few weeks. After all, the other compilers can be installed with 'apt-get install foofoo'.
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation