Is there any word on when dynamic arrays might be functional?

I wish to start a D project, but with neither alloc-free nor dynamic arrays I seem to be unable to do anything at all.

Are dynamic arrays due in days? weeks? months? unknown?

Thanx
Karl Bochert

Karl Bochert wrote:
> Is there any word on when dynamic arrays might be functional?
> 
> I wish to start a D project, but with neither alloc-free nor dynamic
> arrays I seem to be unable to do anything at all.
> 
> Are dynamic arrays due in days? weeks? months? unknown?
> 
> Thanx
> Karl Bochert

afaik, both dynamic arrays and and alloc/free are in D at the moment. To get to malloc and free (which aren't the way that D is meant to be used, but to each his own) you do :

import c.stdlib;

and either:

var * varp = malloc(var.size);

or:

var * varp = stdlib.malloc(var.size);

which should give you your system standard malloc (also calloc, free, alloca, and realloc).

if it is the second one, and the stdlib. annoys you, you can always do this:

alias stdlib.malloc malloc;

etc.

I'm not sure I understand which problems you're having with dynamic arrays.  Care to describe them in more detail?

Evan

> 
> afaik, both dynamic arrays and and alloc/free are in D at the moment. To get to malloc and free (which aren't the way that D is meant to be used, but to each his own) you do :
> 
> import c.stdlib;
> 
> and either:
> 
> var * varp = malloc(var.size);
> 
> or:
> 
> var * varp = stdlib.malloc(var.size);
> 
> which should give you your system standard malloc (also calloc, free, alloca, and realloc).
> 
> if it is the second one, and the stdlib. annoys you, you can always do this:
> 
> alias stdlib.malloc malloc;
> 
> etc.

Thanks -- I keep thinking that if its not in the manual it doesn't exist,
but of course D isn't at that point yet.
I would much prefer dynamic arrays if they worked.

> 
> I'm not sure I understand which problems you're having with dynamic arrays.  Care to describe them in more detail?
>

See my 'Stuid Question'  thread.
Basically my system instantly crashes when I try to do anything
 that involves enlarging a dynamic array.

For instance:
    char[] s;
    char[4] t = "test"
    s =  t.dup;        // bomb
    s.length = 6;    // bomb

Is this problem unique to me?
 Is it only a problem in the latest release?

> Karl
> 

Karl Bochert wrote:

> Thanks -- I keep thinking that if its not in the manual it doesn't exist,
> but of course D isn't at that point yet.
> I would much prefer dynamic arrays if they worked.

yeah, sometimes you have to dig or ask to find anything.  But it's a small project as of yet, and I'm sure that the documentation will improve over time.

> See my 'Stuid Question'  thread.
> Basically my system instantly crashes when I try to do anything
>  that involves enlarging a dynamic array.
>  For instance:
>     char[] s;
>     char[4] t = "test"
>     s =  t.dup;        // bomb
>     s.length = 6;    // bomb
> 
> Is this problem unique to me?
>  Is it only a problem in the latest release?

ok, I've tried some things.  Here are some suggestions.

    char[] s;
    char[] t = "test";

    s = t[0..4];

    s.length = 7;

    s[4] = '!';

    printf("%.*s\n", s);  //prints 'test!'

this works.

    char[] s;
    char[] t = "test";

    s ~= t;

    s.length = 7;

    s[4] = '!';

    printf("%.*s\n", s);

this also works.

    char[] s;
    char[4] t = "test";

    s ~= t;

    s.length = 7;

    s[4] = '!';

    printf("%.*s\n", s);

that too...

    char[] s;
    char[] t = "test";

    s = t.dup;

    s.length = 7;

    s[4] = '!';

    printf("%.*s\n", s);

and here as well.

so I think that the problem is that char[4] isn't the same type as char[], and the compiler isn't catching it and warning you (or giving you an error) at compile time. Which I think that it should, rather than  just puking at runtime, but that's something to take up with Walter. I hope that this has been helpful, at least a little.  Actually, trying something else, check the formatting on your original printf() because I just tried your original example again, and it worked.  Note the printing discussion on the Arrays page in the Docs, down at the bottom.  We really need a native printf() implementation.

Evan

On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:25:58 +0100, Evan McClanahan <evan@dontSPAMaltarinteractive.com> wrote:
> Karl Bochert wrote:
> 

> 
> ok, I've tried some things.  Here are some suggestions.
> 
>      char[] s;
>      char[] t = "test";
> 
>      s = t[0..4];
> 
>      s.length = 7;
> 
>      s[4] = '!';
> 
>      printf("%.*s\n", s);  //prints 'test!'
> 
> this works.

Nope

void foo ()
      char[] s;
      char[] t = "test";

      s = t[0..4];     // ok -- s is just a reference
      s.length = 7;  // fails  -- involves re-allocation
      s[4] = '!';        // fails   --  s[3] = '!'; is ok
      printf("%.*s\n", s);  //No output  (Gui app??)
      }

Called from WinMain() bombs.
Is it just Windows applications?

Walter said that he would look into it, so I guess I'll just
 have to be patient.

I had hoped that it was just a typo in the latest
release (dynamic arrays must have worked by now!).

Is it just my system or am I really the first to try WinMain() ??


Karl

been using WinMain for a while (with a .def file so you don't get a console) though this might be the reason my D directX app only runs for 5 mins then exits without error, BUT

the code works fine for console apps
int main( char[][]args ) { ..... }

on ver 0.50 the following works ( compiled in one go with 'dmd test2.d
test2.def ' )

import windows;
import c.stdio;

extern (C) void gc_init();
extern (C) void gc_term();
extern (C) void _minit();
extern (C) void _moduleCtor();
extern (C) void _moduleUnitTests();

char[256] buf;

void begin()
{
 char[] s;
 char[] t = "test";

 s = t[0..4];
 s.length = 7;
 s[4] = "!";

 sprintf((char *)buf, "%.*s\n", s);
 MessageBoxA(null, (char *)buf, "what ?",
      MB_OK | MB_ICONEXCLAMATION);
}

extern (Windows)
int WinMain(HINSTANCE hInstance,
 HINSTANCE hPrevInstance,
 LPSTR lpCmdLine,
 int nCmdShow)
{
    int result;

    gc_init();   // initialize garbage collector
    _minit();   // initialize module constructor table

    try
    {
 _moduleCtor();  // call module constructors
 _moduleUnitTests(); // run unit tests (optional)

  begin();
    }

    catch (Object o)  // catch any uncaught exceptions
    {
 MessageBoxA(null, (char *)o.toString(), "Error",
      MB_OK | MB_ICONEXCLAMATION);
 result = 0;  // failed
    }

    gc_term();   // run finalizers; terminate garbage collector
    return 1;
}


"Karl Bochert" <kbochert@copper.net> wrote in message news:1103_1039111393@bose...
> On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:25:58 +0100, Evan McClanahan
<evan@dontSPAMaltarinteractive.com> wrote:
> > Karl Bochert wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > ok, I've tried some things.  Here are some suggestions.
> >
> >      char[] s;
> >      char[] t = "test";
> >
> >      s = t[0..4];
> >
> >      s.length = 7;
> >
> >      s[4] = '!';
> >
> >      printf("%.*s\n", s);  //prints 'test!'
> >
> > this works.
>
> Nope
>
> void foo ()
>       char[] s;
>       char[] t = "test";
>
>       s = t[0..4];     // ok -- s is just a reference
>       s.length = 7;  // fails  -- involves re-allocation
>       s[4] = '!';        // fails   --  s[3] = '!'; is ok
>       printf("%.*s\n", s);  //No output  (Gui app??)
>       }
>
> Called from WinMain() bombs.
> Is it just Windows applications?
>
> Walter said that he would look into it, so I guess I'll just
>  have to be patient.
>
> I had hoped that it was just a typo in the latest
> release (dynamic arrays must have worked by now!).
>
> Is it just my system or am I really the first to try WinMain() ??
>
>
> Karl
>
>
>

On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:23:36 -0000, "Mike Wynn" <mike.wynn@l8night.co.uk> wrote:

> 
> on ver 0.50 the following works ( compiled in one go with 'dmd test2.d
> test2.def ' )
> 
> import windows;
> import c.stdio;
> 
> ....
> 

Its a miracle! Not only does it work fine, but the information has magically appeared in the manual!!

Thanx for your patience.
Karl Bochert

"Karl Bochert" <kbochert@copper.net> wrote in message news:1104_1039120628@bose...
> Its a miracle! Not only does it work fine, but the information has
magically
> appeared in the manual!!

I love it when that happens. The gnomes have been at work <g>.