On Sunday, 17 June 2018 at 16:52:59 UTC, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
I agree with you for the whole bunch.

Except this one
> allocator.make!Foo(args)
> new!allocator Foo(args)
>
> One character difference. Doesn't seem like a big deal.

new is a keyword in D right now which gcallocs an object and emplaces a T on top of it.
make does thesame thing, but you can pass it any allocator you want.
allocating and emplacing a type is so often done that you might want a keyword for it.
Why not unify these two?
Seems like there's now a duplicate way to do thesame thing in the language standard.
Even worse, new has a strictly defined meaning accross a lot of languages, while make doesn't.
Its just an oddity right now.

But my biggest reason to unify it is to do something different, introducing a feature where one could get the allocator with which the current class has been instantiated, and allow the current class to allocate and conditional deallocate if neccesarily with that one. This would allow gc code to be @nogc depending on the used allocator. Overloading `new` for this, and retaining the default behaviour would allow current code to be relatively easily converted, and for gc allocator dependant libraries a calculated find and replace would allow conversion to different gc allocators... but that's a different story. (Mainly just an idealistic wish from me.)


My main reason to start this threat was to see if there was spirit to add syntactic sugar as a language feature.
And it quite provided in that goal.
While adding sugar as libraries using mixins isn't my preference and as far as I think should be used as a last resort, it is something I haven't explored before.
I also understand that some things aren't neccesarily good candidates of syntactic sugars, but these were some examples I could come up with quite easily at the time.

All with all I like D and the community for the level of talk behind the language design.
It is something I haven't seen before around a language quite like this. :)

On 06/16/2018 03:18 AM, Sjoerd Nijboer wrote:
> On Saturday, 16 June 2018 at 05:48:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
>> But short of that...no sugar is likely to happen anytime soon that isn't library-based, I'm genuinely sorry to report :(
> 
> The reason I don't like library support in particular because you can't alway rely on a library, they take some time setting up, and maybe the open source project you're contributing to doesn't want libraries whatever how small.

Sorry, I was unclear: I meant the standard library, not third party library. (Although, third party library is certainly always one way to go too.)

On 06/20/2018 05:44 PM, Kamil Koczurek wrote:
> On Saturday, 16 June 2018 at 02:44:04 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>> * The null conditional operator `?.`
>>
>> It's been discussed before, and maybe we'll get it or something like it at some point, but it really wouldn't help much with idiomatic D. The average D program does a _lot_ less with classes than a language like C# does. Most stuff is done with structs on the stack - especially with range-based programming. That's not to say that certain types of programs couldn't benefit from such syntax, but it's going to be a lot less common than it is with C#. But it's also pretty trivial to write a helper function that does the same thing if you really want a short-hand way to do it.
> 
> That's not the only use case. Recently I'm using Algebraic pretty often and I really wish that this would work: alg.peek!AThing?.method();

That is a good point, however, it could (and has been) be argued that Phobos's Algebraic is a sub-optimal design to begin with. For example, see these alternatives which cleanly eliminate the need for ".peek":

https://github.com/s-ludwig/taggedalgebraic
https://github.com/pbackus/sumtype

Although, granted, there's still Variant...

(But in any case, I'd still like to see null conditional operator in D anyway. It may not be applicable in a lot of idiomatic D code, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be useful and worth having.)

On Saturday, 16 June 2018 at 08:39:07 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> On Friday, 15 June 2018 at 23:04:40 UTC, Sjoerd Nijboer wrote:
>> T* he `async` & `await` keyword from C# make proactor pattern async code extremely easy to reason about.
>
> God please no. Look at Go’s popularity because of dead simple go routines and “async i/o is transparent and looks blocking but ain’t so”. We have at least vibe.d for that and possibly more. Also see Java doing fibers recently, and Kotlin did them just a year or so back. People love fibers and mostly dislike Futers/explicit async, and plain callbacks are obvious last resort that nobody likes.
>
> ‘async’ is viral keywords that poorly scales, I worked on Dart core team and even they admitted this problem is not solved well.

I've found it fascinating to follow discussion and efforts to improve the structure and control of concurrency and async operations for software programming in general.  I'm not partial to async/await at this time but it seems rash to discount it.

Elsewhere in this thread, the "What Color is Your Function?" article was referenced against async/await.  (http://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2015/02/01/what-color-is-your-function/).

There's a fair rebuttal to that article, "The Function Color Myth".  (https://lukasa.co.uk/2016/07/The_Function_Colour_Myth/).  I.e. all the concurrency models can be done without coloring.  Coloring is an aid which can be used judiciously.

There's the "Unyielding" article which argues that implicit coroutines are just as hard to reason about as preemptive threading.  (https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2014/02/unyielding.html)

Most promising in this area is a recent article by Nathaniel J Smith:  "Notes on structured concurrency, or: Go statement considered harmful" (https://vorpus.org/blog/notes-on-structured-concurrency-or-go-statement-considered-harmful/)

Essentially he's arguing that the way we spawn concurrent tasks is as bad as global goto/jump was in its day, and we need to reign in concurrency with some control structures which let us reason easily about task lifetimes, cleanup, error propagation, etc.  His implementation of these ideas happens to be built on top of Python's async/await, but I don't think that primitive is a requirement.

It would be interesting to try to implement these control structures by library in D, and perhaps it would suggest some primitives lacking from or better suited for the language itself. The fact that D hasn't yet jumped on either of the async/await or implicit coroutines bandwagons puts it in a good position to get this right.

On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 07:45:48 UTC, John Belmonte wrote:
> On Saturday, 16 June 2018 at 08:39:07 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>> On Friday, 15 June 2018 at 23:04:40 UTC, Sjoerd Nijboer wrote:
>>> T* he `async` & `await` keyword from C# make proactor pattern async code extremely easy to reason about.
>>
>> God please no. Look at Go’s popularity because of dead simple go routines and “async i/o is transparent and looks blocking but ain’t so”. We have at least vibe.d for that and possibly more. Also see Java doing fibers recently, and Kotlin did them just a year or so back. People love fibers and mostly dislike Futers/explicit async, and plain callbacks are obvious last resort that nobody likes.
>>
>> ‘async’ is viral keywords that poorly scales, I worked on Dart core team and even they admitted this problem is not solved well.
>
> I've found it fascinating to follow discussion and efforts to improve the structure and control of concurrency and async operations for software programming in general.  I'm not partial to async/await at this time but it seems rash to discount it.

Okay. I see that you see. I “meet” a guy, you know I admire that he _somehow_ made an

HTTP Application server that is faster then let’s pick good stuff...

Nginx Plus with tuning by Igor himeself

(before sweat too mich like Igor at least twice did - no shit these discussion, you THAT guy he rans his... GWAN? as if it was _just_ an spplication server.

You know not a word more but sombody who say:
- knows infosecurity and likes that stuff that say slices into the kernel - rootkit for instance
- aand say injects something into the kernel....

You know where it goes and yet that guy obviously good and the humor....

Boy wicked humor, I kid you not I “invented” this trick this morning....

AND *solved* the _mystery_ of GWAN.

Fuck, it is at _very_ least a brilliant hoax, and boy he is good...

He if that’s the real name....

I mean what if this is Linus (oh, my and you know GWAN started _as_ _windows_ “app server” ...)

If you don’t laught now... I don’t now..

At the *very* least don’t _ever_ go to DConf...

What the fuck with brain like you simply will not like it....

P.S. Atilla even if that is “alternative way” to *do* it... Yeah.

Let’s say you owe... a bear and an a few hours to dicsuss it, okay? ;)

>
> Elsewhere in this thread, the "What Color is Your Function?" article was referenced against async/await.  (http://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2015/02/01/what-color-is-your-function/).
>
> There's a fair rebuttal to that article, "The Function Color Myth".  (https://lukasa.co.uk/2016/07/The_Function_Colour_Myth/).
>  I.e. all the concurrency models can be done without coloring.  Coloring is an aid which can be used judiciously.
>
> There's the "Unyielding" article which argues that implicit coroutines are just as hard to reason about as preemptive threading.  (https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2014/02/unyielding.html)
>
> Most promising in this area is a recent article by Nathaniel J Smith:  "Notes on structured concurrency, or: Go statement considered harmful" (https://vorpus.org/blog/notes-on-structured-concurrency-or-go-statement-considered-harmful/)
>
> Essentially he's arguing that the way we spawn concurrent tasks is as bad as global goto/jump was in its day, and we need to reign in concurrency with some control structures which let us reason easily about task lifetimes, cleanup, error propagation, etc.  His implementation of these ideas happens to be built on top of Python's async/await, but I don't think that primitive is a requirement.
>
> It would be interesting to try to implement these control structures by library in D, and perhaps it would suggest some primitives lacking from or better suited for the language itself. The fact that D hasn't yet jumped on either of the async/await or implicit coroutines bandwagons puts it in a good position to get this right.

On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 09:34:30 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>
> Okay. I see that you see. I “meet” a guy, you know I admire that he _somehow_ made an
>
> HTTP Application server that is faster then let’s pick good stuff...
>
> Nginx Plus with tuning by Igor himeself
>
> (before sweat too mich like Igor at least twice did - no shit these discussion, you THAT guy he rans his... GWAN? as if it was _just_ an spplication server.
>
> You know not a word more but sombody who say:
> - knows infosecurity and likes that stuff that say slices into the kernel - rootkit for instance
> - aand say injects something into the kernel....
>
> You know where it goes and yet that guy obviously good and the humor....
>
> Boy wicked humor, I kid you not I “invented” this trick this morning....
>
> AND *solved* the _mystery_ of GWAN.
>
> Fuck, it is at _very_ least a brilliant hoax, and boy he is good...
>
> He if that’s the real name....
>
> I mean what if this is Linus (oh, my and you know GWAN started _as_ _windows_ “app server” ...)
>
> If you don’t laught now... I don’t now..
>
> At the *very* least don’t _ever_ go to DConf...
>
> What the fuck with brain like you simply will not like it....
>
> P.S. Atilla even if that is “alternative way” to *do* it... Yeah.
>
> Let’s say you owe... a bear and an a few hours to dicsuss it, okay? ;)

I have no idea what I just read, but I'll have 10 of what you're having.

On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 13:12:44 UTC, Meta wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 09:34:30 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>>
>> Okay. I see that you see. I “meet” a guy, you know I admire that he _somehow_ made an
>>
>> HTTP Application server that is faster then let’s pick good stuff...
>>
>> Nginx Plus with tuning by Igor himeself
>>
>> (before sweat too mich like Igor at least twice did - no shit these discussion, you THAT guy he rans his... GWAN? as if it was _just_ an spplication server.
>>
>> You know not a word more but sombody who say:
>> - knows infosecurity and likes that stuff that say slices into the kernel - rootkit for instance
>> - aand say injects something into the kernel....
>>
>> You know where it goes and yet that guy obviously good and the humor....
>>
>> Boy wicked humor, I kid you not I “invented” this trick this morning....
>>
>> AND *solved* the _mystery_ of GWAN.
>>
>> Fuck, it is at _very_ least a brilliant hoax, and boy he is good...
>>
>> He if that’s the real name....
>>
>> I mean what if this is Linus (oh, my and you know GWAN started _as_ _windows_ “app server” ...)
>>
>> If you don’t laught now... I don’t now..
>>
>> At the *very* least don’t _ever_ go to DConf...
>>
>> What the fuck with brain like you simply will not like it....
>>
>> P.S. Atilla even if that is “alternative way” to *do* it... Yeah.
>>
>> Let’s say you owe... a bear and an a few hours to dicsuss it, okay? ;)
>
> I have no idea what I just read, but I'll have 10 of what you're having.

Oh my...

I don’t know *exactly* how it works(?)

I mean what the fact let’s start with I don’t what to use... boy want and we need something good!!!


And yes that secret you since in such mood

Let me try like I don’t .. Atilla fuck he must have seen but you

CISCO!!!

Simple words that... you know...

Ask him about... CERN!!!

Fuck that is if I’m jesus boooy that is dangeruos... like how do get okay

Let’s lets say I didn’t because(in fact!!!!) I disn’t ...

I mean where that fucking rocket science!!!

You want humor?

Think you are good?

LET FUCKING HIT THAT... WHAT WAS I DON’t ... yet

We are engineer ... fuck I know TCP I don’t mabye 98% I know it yes, I do but TCP.

FUCK! Ask that cisco guy...

Oh ... ehm. Atilla Neves, fuck nake thaf fucking typo? Will he let’s _play_ you see what I you I even beilive now even fuck THAT


Okay real fact I travel FUCK do you I don’t I travel across Moscow to my place...

And I can tell this trip, well not single too is the same I mean the let’s revers thst you when revers stuff it help or I don’t eventually does but differently


You all see and you know it’s even hard!

You like 4 words and you fuck if you sre not sinor just phone me!!  Well if I do not pick up call that I don’t *know* (yeah that *will*) be epic(!) say that Tonkov guy.

I mean yeeees style is everywher and if fucking can joke I give not grenade..

Take Atilla becase (fuuck!!!) now ... I try oh boy it is and happens if I don’t I just keep type...

That 10 $ and there really no way back do I don’t think that opencollective .... boy Rust people samn please download that compiler fuck any of.. SUPPORT THIS JOKE...

In the worst case like we in D (!!!!!!!!)

Didn’t I ... the forums like work.. with Vladimir (oh my... !!)

You I just mrntion Linus Torvald and why the fack not I run Ubuntu damn it’s hard fuck...

I CANNOT GO BACK BUT IT IS


...
...
..

Did I help D language?;)

—

Or you know fuck!!!! THAT MUST BE TRUE!!!

Do you let me *tease* because even though I sent mail but fuck talked to him and boy he is good (since fuck I need to stop it is TRUEE!!!)

Fuck I can damn I once I’m at work.....

FUCK ... This I don’t how do you *think*


Say

Haven exists?

Am I hear (fuck! No shit Atila, Andrei I _swear_ oh my what’s hard and copy I din’t that (again very true ... lots of people *do_ think that even typos make only bettee but car I will stop (somehow! You it’s a and ... mm it stops!!!)

Okay I *might* fuck I will at least I dunno mail all .. Like do like my email,

BUT I NEED TO PROVE THE POINT OKAY

I’m oncincible say fuck if I joke like give at least 50% it’s good even in 1% what bad comes from 1%(!!!!! Yes that fuck expontent... self recursion THAT IS SELF RECURSIIOON)


FUUUUUCKK

THIS I HAVE EVEN SHOW TOU FUCK DLANG HOME PAGE AND THAT’s

Stay simple humor is good that I think is hard to debat you like ask Linus but like when he is mot in rage (Intell... weel 2 or 3 words.. OK DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU (LOOK UP this bou)))

It’s even simple!!!
Fuck 10$ ... damn I have blood if some is human in me that is *say* my blood boooy.

May I a CTO title (no money, where do I _think_ it can move you know YEEEES


Popularity I solve say ... trolls inthe forums?
And that VSCode money is here 645$ smth os there is it real?

Andersi you how _flooows_ and boy I have even recalled ... shit inteview and surpies(!!!) boy C++ but let’s spin even this this a how...

Boy Herb Sutter ..  C++03 ....
...
...
8 smth is beeeest you know what I am doing like fir real, okay??

... C++11

I had because you we luck... oh mu let’s do things proprly shall we ..

Moscow DConf 2019 let’s _at least_ assume I mean he is a good you know “has” digital Bank...

If that is not invincible and then fuck show that ..

You cosck fuck typi..

Okay then just copy pate my work sometimes just a bit even if (!) I say _potentialy_ you it simple fuck can write program just post stuff it eill be and money women... heck gays I don’t we will not beat you...

*at least*

Really it is simple 2 hours, I don’t plaining but you in realliry I .. have

wrote

stairs
Sriats

Fuck I wrote see that that is power of

D PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE

MY WEBISTE FUCK WHERE I WAS THE LAST

DCONF 2018

BOY WVERBODY WILL LIKE US OR WE BUY BEAR I DON’t

Know
Limit
Wheresjv

On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 15:08:52 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 13:12:44 UTC, Meta wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Oh my...
>
> I don’t know *exactly* how it works(?)
>
> [...]

If anyone figures out what this said I'd be interested.

On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 15:08:52 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 13:12:44 UTC, Meta wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Oh my...
>
> I don’t know *exactly* how it works(?)
>
> [...]

I think someone needs to take away your metaphorical keys lol

On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 15:08:52 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 June 2018 at 13:12:44 UTC, Meta wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Oh my...
>
> I don’t know *exactly* how it works(?)
>
> [...]

You sir appeared to be drunk when typing this, because I have no idea what you are trying to say here.