digitalmars.D.announce - Embarrassment of riches: another talk came online today
- Andrei Alexandrescu (6/6) Jun 10 2014 "Leverage" - my talk at Lang.NEXT.
- deadalnix (7/13) Jun 10 2014 I think you explanation of the "talking address of a function" is
- justme (7/13) Jun 11 2014 I cannot accept
- Jesse Phillips (6/11) Jun 11 2014 The point wasn't about how best to fix the problem, it was about
- Andrei Alexandrescu (2/18) Jun 11 2014 That was the point made by the talk as well. -- Andrei
- Peter Alexander (11/12) Jun 11 2014 I think this is one of your better D talks. It's refreshing to
- Brad Anderson (13/25) Jun 11 2014 Yes, that example was great. I do wonder if everyone watching
- Dmitry Olshansky (9/10) Jun 12 2014 Loved the title at first site and indeed the talk was great.
- Jacob Carlborg (5/8) Jun 12 2014 Is that still supported? I thought it was removed to be able to
"Leverage" - my talk at Lang.NEXT. http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27sp6r/langnext_2014_leverage_by_andrei_alexandrescu/ https://news.ycombinator.com/newest https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/476400279160885248 https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/863665863647096 Andrei
Jun 10 2014
"deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> On Tuesday, 10 June 2014 at 16:30:31 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:"Leverage" - my talk at Lang.NEXT. http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27sp6r/langnext_2014_leverage_by_andrei_alexandrescu/ https://news.ycombinator.com/newest https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/476400279160885248 https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/863665863647096 AndreiI think you explanation of the "talking address of a function" is quite goofy, and the crowd at Land.NEXT probably knows it. C and C++ are literally the only languages (with D) that have this idiotic notion of an address of a function. Even the assembly code it compiler to do not !
Jun 10 2014
On Tuesday, 10 June 2014 at 16:30:31 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:"Leverage" - my talk at Lang.NEXT. http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27sp6r/langnext_2014_leverage_by_andrei_alexandrescu/ https://news.ycombinator.com/newest https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/476400279160885248 https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/863665863647096 AndreiI cannot accept 10. .iota; // The space here is unacceptable. Please have the programmer change 10. to 10.0 so that we have 10.0.iota; // Cleaner, obvious, and doesn't look like a typo. Thank you.
Jun 11 2014
On Wednesday, 11 June 2014 at 18:06:03 UTC, justme wrote:I cannot accept 10. .iota; // The space here is unacceptable. Please have the programmer change 10. to 10.0 so that we have 10.0.iota; // Cleaner, obvious, and doesn't look like a typo. Thank you.The point wasn't about how best to fix the problem, it was about grammar parsing and what was legal/illegal. 10..iota doesn't parse 10. .ioat does 10.0.iota or 10F.iota are proper solutions for readability.
Jun 11 2014
On 6/11/14, 11:06 AM, justme wrote:On Tuesday, 10 June 2014 at 16:30:31 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:That was the point made by the talk as well. -- Andrei"Leverage" - my talk at Lang.NEXT. http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27sp6r/langnext_2014_leverage_by_andrei_alexandrescu/ https://news.ycombinator.com/newest https://twitter.com/D_Programming/status/476400279160885248 https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/863665863647096 AndreiI cannot accept 10. .iota; // The space here is unacceptable.
Jun 11 2014
On Tuesday, 10 June 2014 at 16:30:31 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:"Leverage" - my talk at Lang.NEXT.I think this is one of your better D talks. It's refreshing to see honest admittance of the shortcomings of D's features, although I think a little too much time was spent talking about inconsequential parsing quirks with UFCS (you can write goofy looking code in any language). The GC scan function was a really nice example: short, real, and instructive. In general, I think more example code would help -- it makes everything more concrete. Good job!
Jun 11 2014
On Wednesday, 11 June 2014 at 19:47:56 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:On Tuesday, 10 June 2014 at 16:30:31 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:Yes, that example was great. I do wonder if everyone watching understood how neat that code was, particularly those who only use dynamically typed languages but also those unfamiliar with D or C++ templates. It might help to have a slide that expands a template for two different inputs to show what's going on prior to getting to the cool stuff. Also, I'd give a quick blurb about the template parameter syntax in future talks. It's a bit quirky so I think a sentence or two before getting into examples is helpful. I know I was confused by it the first time I saw it (I think it was something like to!int(var); and I was rather confused by what was going on there)."Leverage" - my talk at Lang.NEXT.I think this is one of your better D talks. It's refreshing to see honest admittance of the shortcomings of D's features, although I think a little too much time was spent talking about inconsequential parsing quirks with UFCS (you can write goofy looking code in any language). The GC scan function was a really nice example: short, real, and instructive. In general, I think more example code would help -- it makes everything more concrete. Good job!
Jun 11 2014
10-Jun-2014 20:30, Andrei Alexandrescu пишет:"Leverage" - my talk at Lang.NEXT.Loved the title at first site and indeed the talk was great. It's definitely something I'd show people to get them into D, honest and intriguing. Seems ironic to say that D has no legacy baggage compared to C++ and then have a readily served self-defeat with the goofy 10. and .1 being supported for the sake of compatibility with C :) -- Dmitry Olshansky
Jun 12 2014
On 13/06/14 00:47, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:Seems ironic to say that D has no legacy baggage compared to C++ and then have a readily served self-defeat with the goofy 10. and .1 being supported for the sake of compatibility with C :)Is that still supported? I thought it was removed to be able to implement UFCS. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Jun 12 2014