www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - More bad D links

reply James Dunne <james.jdunne gmail.com> writes:
Noting the recent DServicesAPI wiki hijack, I decided it would be a good idea to
check the other D links...  here are the other bad ones I've found:

http://ikagames.com/andy/d/swig-with-dmd.tar.bz2 - 404 error
http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/language-d-194.html - this just looks
completely worthless
http://www.scratch-ware.net/D/ - 404 error
http://users.tpg.com.au/smackoz/ - 404 error
http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/cgi-local/pragprog?TheDLanguage - "Could not
go to or create /u/web/pragm4/wiki/pragprog: No such file or directory"
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd - moved to opend.org
http://www.thedjournal.com/ - has been late on their Spring 2004 issue for 1.5
years...
http://www.codemoon.com/cm/dpage.php - 404 error
http://neuropolis.org/project/lua_from_d/ - 401 authorization required
http://badmama.com.au/%7Eanderson/d - 403 forbidden
http://www.thecodebase.com/elephant.html should be
http://www.thecodebase.com/index.html

I might've missed a few, and I didn't bother to check the Japanese sites because
I wouldn't know if they looked right or not! =).

Regards,
James Dunne
Jul 24 2005
next sibling parent reply user domain.invalid writes:
James Dunne wrote:
 http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/language-d-194.html - this just looks
 completely worthless

I beg to differ. This is a link to a site that demonstrates the wide variety of programing languages available, and how they are used to implement a simple programming problem. It lets one see the differences between the languages, and how they can be used (or abused). The site is well organized and makes it easy to locate your favorite language. The fact that the D version is very simple (and hence boring) doesn't mean the link it worthless. Dennis Cote
Jul 25 2005
parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
user domain.invalid wrote:
 James Dunne wrote:
 http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/language-d-194.html - this just looks
 completely worthless


 The fact that the D version is very simple (and hence boring) doesn't 
 mean the link it worthless.

Did you even notice the "More Examples" link? Maybe if the link in that list could be changed to point to this one as well.... Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Jul 26 2005
parent reply "Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle mathworks.com> writes:
"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:dc5gn9$qa2$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 user domain.invalid wrote:
 James Dunne wrote:
 http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/language-d-194.html - this just looks
 completely worthless


 The fact that the D version is very simple (and hence boring) doesn't 
 mean the link it worthless.

Did you even notice the "More Examples" link? Maybe if the link in that list could be changed to point to this one as well.... Stewart.

cute - I added a variation on yours: import std.stdio; import std.string; void main() { int bottles = 99; char[] plural() { return bottles==1 ? "" : "s"; } while (bottles != 0) { writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer on the wall,"); writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer."); writefln("Take one down, pass it around,"); bottles--; writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer on the wall.\n"); } } which actually raises a question if a function with no parens is legal or if it's a bug that the above "plural" calls work.
Jul 26 2005
parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Ben Hinkle wrote:
<snip>
 cute - I added a variation on yours:
 
 import std.stdio;
 import std.string;
 void main() {
     int bottles = 99;
     char[] plural() {
         return bottles==1 ? "" : "s";
     }
     while (bottles != 0) {
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer on the wall,");
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer.");
         writefln("Take one down, pass it around,");
         bottles--;
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer on the wall.\n");
     }
 }
 
 which actually raises a question if a function with no parens is legal or if 
 it's a bug that the above "plural" calls work. 

AIUI it's supposed to work. It's a property get. And even this works: writefln = "Take one down, pass it around,"; Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Jul 26 2005
parent reply "Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle mathworks.com> writes:
"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:dc5lbe$u0d$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Ben Hinkle wrote:
 <snip>
 cute - I added a variation on yours:

 import std.stdio;
 import std.string;
 void main() {
     int bottles = 99;
     char[] plural() {
         return bottles==1 ? "" : "s";
     }
     while (bottles != 0) {
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer on the wall,");
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer.");
         writefln("Take one down, pass it around,");
         bottles--;
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer on the wall.\n");
     }
 }

 which actually raises a question if a function with no parens is legal or 
 if it's a bug that the above "plural" calls work.

AIUI it's supposed to work. It's a property get. And even this works: writefln = "Take one down, pass it around,";

But why would a top-level function (or a nested function in a top-level function) be considered a property? I'm tempted to say the current behavior is a bug. Properties should only be members of a struct or class (which would include static struct or class properties).
Jul 26 2005
next sibling parent "Charles" <noone nowhere.com> writes:
I kind of like it , some languages ( pascal ? ) support calling functions
that take no arguments w/o parens .



"Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle mathworks.com> wrote in message
news:dc5m7h$uoj$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message
 news:dc5lbe$u0d$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Ben Hinkle wrote:
 <snip>
 cute - I added a variation on yours:

 import std.stdio;
 import std.string;
 void main() {
     int bottles = 99;
     char[] plural() {
         return bottles==1 ? "" : "s";
     }
     while (bottles != 0) {
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer on the wall,");
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer.");
         writefln("Take one down, pass it around,");
         bottles--;
         writefln(bottles," bottle",plural," of beer on the wall.\n");
     }
 }

 which actually raises a question if a function with no parens is legal



 if it's a bug that the above "plural" calls work.

AIUI it's supposed to work. It's a property get. And even this works: writefln = "Take one down, pass it around,";

But why would a top-level function (or a nested function in a top-level function) be considered a property? I'm tempted to say the current

 is a bug. Properties should only be members of a struct or class (which
 would include static struct or class properties).

Jul 26 2005
prev sibling next sibling parent Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Ben Hinkle wrote:
 "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
 news:dc5lbe$u0d$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 AIUI it's supposed to work.  It's a property get.

 And even this works:

     writefln = "Take one down, pass it around,";

But why would a top-level function (or a nested function in a top-level function) be considered a property? I'm tempted to say the current behavior is a bug. Properties should only be members of a struct or class (which would include static struct or class properties).

Good question. The spec indeed refers to the concept as "Class and Struct Properties". Though it also ought to mention the word "union" in there. The trouble is that some might think of top-level properties as module properties, and hence as a neat analogue of class/struct/union properties. Maybe it's a matter of making the spec that bit clearer.... But my slight surprise is that it works on variadic functions. Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Jul 27 2005
prev sibling parent reply Manfred Nowak <svv1999 hotmail.com> writes:
"Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle mathworks.com> wrote:

[...]
 But why would a top-level function (or a nested function in a
 top-level function) be considered a property? I'm tempted to say
 the current behavior is a bug.

Hmm, lets drive that to the limits: <code> f= g; </code> What is the effect of this assignment, if f and g are both function variables of the same type and in addition f and g have this type as a parameter and as a return value? I know that there are currently restrictions on this example. But are this restrictions somehow natural --- or do they hinder general solutions, i.e. cripple D in an unnecessary way. -manfred
Jul 27 2005
parent Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Manfred Nowak wrote:

 "Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle mathworks.com> wrote:
 
 [...]
 
 But why would a top-level function (or a nested function in a 
 top-level function) be considered a property? I'm tempted to say 
 the current behavior is a bug.

[...] Hmm, lets drive that to the limits: <code> f= g; </code> What is the effect of this assignment, if f and g are both function variables of the same type

If they are function _variables_, then f will be made a reference to the same function as g is. If f and g are the actual names of functions, OTOH, then the code is equivalent to f(g());
 and in addition f and g have this type as a parameter and as a return
 value?

Hmm ... do recursive types work in D? I'll have to check.... Stewart. -- My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Aug 06 2005
prev sibling next sibling parent pragma <pragma_member pathlink.com> writes:
I thought I'd hack around to see if there's any life left in these links.  As it
turns out, I have a correction for one of them:

http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/cgi-local/pragprog?TheDLanguage - "Could not
go to or create /u/web/pragm4/wiki/pragprog: No such file or directory"

The page is now located here: http://wiki.pragprog.com/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/TheDLanguage - EricAnderton at yahoo
Jul 25 2005
prev sibling parent J C Calvarese <technocrat7 gmail.com> writes:
In article <dc1k6u$rag$1 digitaldaemon.com>, James Dunne says...
Noting the recent DServicesAPI wiki hijack, I decided it would be a good idea to
check the other D links...  here are the other bad ones I've found:

http://ikagames.com/andy/d/swig-with-dmd.tar.bz2 - 404 error

I've mentioned this issue on the "feedback and comments" page (http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DocComments/DLinks). I guess Andy's new page is http://aegisknight.org/~andy/d/, but it might be better to link to http://www.dsource.org/projects/swig4d/.
http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/language-d-194.html - this just looks
completely worthless

It's not completely worthless.
http://www.scratch-ware.net/D/ - 404 error

I think this should be http://www.scratch-ware.net/dfiles/ ..
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd - moved to opend.org

No kidding. That happened what -- 3 years ago? The opend.org web page is still there, but it appears to be abandoned, too.
http://www.thedjournal.com/ - has been late on their Spring 2004 issue for 1.5
years...

Yep. ..
I might've missed a few, and I didn't bother to check the Japanese sites because
I wouldn't know if they looked right or not! =).

Regards,
James Dunne

You brought up some good points. jcc7
Jul 26 2005