digitalmars.D.announce - DMD 0.129 release
- "Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> Aug 06 2005
- zwang <nehzgnaw gmail.com> Aug 06 2005
- zwang <nehzgnaw gmail.com> Aug 06 2005
- David L. Davis <SpottedTiger yahoo.com> Aug 07 2005
- "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> Aug 07 2005
- "Uwe Salomon" <post uwesalomon.de> Aug 07 2005
- "Ben Hinkle" <ben.hinkle gmail.com> Aug 07 2005
- "Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> Aug 08 2005
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
Aug 06 2005
zwang <nehzgnaw gmail.com> Walter wrote:http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
New std.format does not handle bit arrays properly. Test case: bit[] ba; ba ~= false; ba ~= true; writef("%s\n", ba); //outputs "[false,false]" writef("[%s,%s]", ba[0], ba[1]); //outputs "[false,true]"
Aug 06 2005
Walter wrote:http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
The invalid-lvalue-crashes-dmd bug is also fixed. Maybe that should also be written in the changelog?
Aug 06 2005
In article <dd458u$2n3u$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
Walter, thanks for adding the string literal indicators, though I thought they would've have been prefixes instead of postfixes, because of the many posts on the subject back in the days when Jill and others (myself included) requested something like this. But hey, it works, and I'm not about to "kick a gift horse in the mouth!" :) In my small test below it appears that the 'char' literals are missing this new feature, will you be adding this to them as well? Thanks for your reply in advance. # //strtest2.d # private import std.stdio; # private import std.stdarg; // for argument gathering # # int main() # { # displaytype("ABC"c); # displaytype("ABC"w); # displaytype("ABC"d); # # // Shouldn't we expect that these new # // postfixes to work with the char as well? # //displaytype('A'c); # //displaytype('B'w); # //displaytype('C'd); # # return 0; # } # # void displaytype(...) # { # if (_arguments[0] is typeid(char[])) # writefln("Literal \"%s\"c is a UTF8 string", # va_arg!(char[])(_argptr)); # else if (_arguments[0] is typeid(wchar[])) # writefln("Literal \"%s\"w is a UTF16 string", # va_arg!(wchar[])(_argptr)); # else if (_arguments[0] is typeid(dchar[])) # writefln("Literal \"%s\"d is a UTF32 string", # va_arg!(dchar[])(_argptr)); # else if (_arguments[0] is typeid(char)) # writefln("Literal '%s'c is a UTF8 char", va_arg!(char)(_argptr)); # else if (_arguments[0] is typeid(wchar)) # writefln("Literal '%s'w is a UTF16 char", va_arg!(wchar)(_argptr)); # else if (_arguments[0] is typeid(dchar)) # writefln("Literal '%s'd is a UTF32 string", va_arg!(dchar)(_argptr)); # } # Output: ---------- C:\dmd>dmd strtest2.d C:\dmd\bin\..\..\dm\bin\link.exe strtest2,,,user32+kernel32/noi; C:\dmd>strtest2 Literal "ABC"c is a UTF8 string Literal "ABC"w is a UTF16 string Literal "ABC"d is a UTF32 string C:\dmd> David L. ------------------------------------------------------------------- "Dare to reach for the Stars...Dare to Dream, Build, and Achieve!" ------------------------------------------------------------------- MKoD: http://spottedtiger.tripod.com/D_Language/D_Main_XP.html
Aug 07 2005
"David L. Davis" <SpottedTiger yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dd515n$97m$1 digitaldaemon.com...Walter, thanks for adding the string literal indicators, though I thought they would've have been prefixes instead of postfixes, because of the many posts on the subject back in the days when Jill and others (myself included) requested something like this. But hey, it works, and I'm not about to "kick a gift horse in the mouth!" :)
I'm also a little surprised that they're postfixes instead of prefixes, since D already has the r and x prefixes. c, w, and d as prefixes would be a little more consistent, and would maybe even make more sense to those coming from C++ that has the L prefix. I like them, though.
Aug 07 2005
I'm also a little surprised that they're postfixes instead of prefixes, since D already has the r and x prefixes. c, w, and d as prefixes would be a little more consistent, and would maybe even make more sense to those coming from C++ that has the L prefix.
How to denote a WYSIWYG UTF-16 string, then? rw"This way???" That makes no sense, eh? And the number modifiers are postfixes, too (234u, 23.54l etc.). Ciao uwe
Aug 07 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dd5gpa$kt2$1 digitaldaemon.com..."David L. Davis" <SpottedTiger yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dd515n$97m$1 digitaldaemon.com...Walter, thanks for adding the string literal indicators, though I thought they would've have been prefixes instead of postfixes, because of the many posts on the subject back in the days when Jill and others (myself included) requested something like this. But hey, it works, and I'm not about to "kick a gift horse in the mouth!" :)
I'm also a little surprised that they're postfixes instead of prefixes, since D already has the r and x prefixes. c, w, and d as prefixes would be a little more consistent, and would maybe even make more sense to those coming from C++ that has the L prefix. I like them, though.
Postfix makes it easier to parse since you don't have to look for cr", rc" permutations. The r/x are mutually exclusive and the c/w/d are mutually exclusive so it works out. Hopefully we won't need any more flags on string literals or else we'll have to get really creative.
Aug 07 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dd5gpa$kt2$1 digitaldaemon.com...I'm also a little surprised that they're postfixes instead of prefixes, since D already has the r and x prefixes. c, w, and d as prefixes would
a little more consistent, and would maybe even make more sense to those coming from C++ that has the L prefix.
Postfixes because: 1) consistent with numeric postfixes l, u, f, i, to specify type. 2) the string prefixes don't specify type, they specify in what format the string will be
Aug 08 2005