www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - Slides from LASER 2012

reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
I've had the honor of rubbing shoulders for a week at 
http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/ with Roberto Ierusalimschy, Ivar 
Jacobson, Erik Meijer, Bertrand Meyer, Martin Odersky, Simon 
Peyton-Jones, and Guido van Rossum. It was awesome, and I got many good 
tips on how to grow our community.

In particular, I've enjoyed a few good discussions with Simon and Martin 
about D's approach to doing things. In particular, Martin has been quite 
impressed with our approach to purity and immutability. We are 
considering a collaboration with one of his students on a paper to 
formalize the approach and possibly adapt it to Scala.

So, these are the slides I've used (though of course they don't tell 
much of the story).

http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/slides/Alexandrescu/2-D%20course%20parts%201%20and%202.pdf


Andrei
Sep 20 2012
next sibling parent reply "Simen Kjaeraas" <simen.kjaras gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:57:45 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 I've had the honor of rubbing shoulders for a week at  
 http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/ with Roberto Ierusalimschy, Ivar  
 Jacobson, Erik Meijer, Bertrand Meyer, Martin Odersky, Simon  
 Peyton-Jones, and Guido van Rossum. It was awesome, and I got many good  
 tips on how to grow our community.

 In particular, I've enjoyed a few good discussions with Simon and Martin  
 about D's approach to doing things. In particular, Martin has been quite  
 impressed with our approach to purity and immutability. We are  
 considering a collaboration with one of his students on a paper to  
 formalize the approach and possibly adapt it to Scala.

 So, these are the slides I've used (though of course they don't tell  
 much of the story).

 http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/slides/Alexandrescu/2-D%20course%20parts%201%20and%202.pdf

Cool. And now the inevitable: Will there be video? -- Simen
Sep 20 2012
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/20/12 10:06 AM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
 Cool. And now the inevitable: Will there be video?

No video was taken. Andrei
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent reply deadalnix <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
Le 20/09/2012 14:57, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
 I've had the honor of rubbing shoulders for a week at
 http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/ with Roberto Ierusalimschy, Ivar
 Jacobson, Erik Meijer, Bertrand Meyer, Martin Odersky, Simon
 Peyton-Jones, and Guido van Rossum. It was awesome, and I got many good
 tips on how to grow our community.

 In particular, I've enjoyed a few good discussions with Simon and Martin
 about D's approach to doing things. In particular, Martin has been quite
 impressed with our approach to purity and immutability. We are
 considering a collaboration with one of his students on a paper to
 formalize the approach and possibly adapt it to Scala.

 So, these are the slides I've used (though of course they don't tell
 much of the story).

 http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/slides/Alexandrescu/2-D%20course%20parts%201%20and%202.pdf



 Andrei

What is Sininimp-Mulinint object-oriented style ?
Sep 20 2012
next sibling parent "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 14:15:22 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
 What is Sininimp-Mulinint object-oriented style ?

I believe it's some weird way of saying: SINgle INheritance of IMPlementation MULtiple INheritance of INTerfaces As opposed to C++ where you can multiply inherit implementations.
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/20/12 10:16 AM, deadalnix wrote:
 What is Sininimp-Mulinint object-oriented style ?

Single inheritance of implementation, multiple inheritance of interface. Andrei
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Andrei Alexandrescu:

 In particular, Martin has been quite impressed with our 
 approach to purity and immutability. We are considering a 
 collaboration with one of his students on a paper to formalize 
 the approach and possibly adapt it to Scala.

Formalizing D purity is probably possible, but it already has many special cases, and few more are coming (see Bugzilla on this)! Regarding cross pollination with Scala: despite I generally don't like lazy lists in high-performance code, in many other kinds of code they are very handy, as in Haskell, Perl6 and Scala (in Scala they are named purely functional lazy streams). If you take a look at Python/Scala/C# code that generates values lazily, the Range-based version in D is sometimes several times longer, much more easy to get wrong, harder to write, etc. This is Haskell code to test if just the leaves of two binary trees contain the same data, this code is lazy: data Tree a = Leaf a | Node (Tree a) (Tree a) fringe :: Tree a -> [a] fringe (Leaf x) = [x] fringe (Node n1 n2) = fringe n1 ++ fringe n2 sameFringe :: (Eq a) => Tree a -> Tree a -> Bool sameFringe t1 t2 = fringe t1 == fringe t2 Doing the same thing in D, using ranges, is possible, but the code is ten times longer or more: http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Same_Fringe#Strong_Lazy_Version Similar code is possible in Scala (and in this case most of the saving of lines of code doesn't come from pattern matching and algebraic data types, but from the good support for lazy lists/streams). This kind of code is very common, even when you aren't coding in functional style. --------------------
 So, these are the slides I've used (though of course they don't 
 tell much of the story).

 http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/slides/Alexandrescu/2-D%20course%20parts%201%20and%202.pdf

Thank you for the slides. I hope we'll have the range-based min(), and argmin/argmax in Phobos :-) -------------------- At page 33: auto m = s.argmin!((x) => x.length); This isn't compiled with -property. So what's the right way to write D code? In Python to avoid that lambda there is a len() global function, that just calls the __len__ attribute/property of collections and objects. So an equivalent Python version is: auto m = s.argmin!len; Bye, bearophile
Sep 20 2012
parent reply Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 09/20/2012 04:23 PM, bearophile wrote:
 Andrei Alexandrescu:

 In particular, Martin has been quite impressed with our approach to
 purity and immutability. We are considering a collaboration with one
 of his students on a paper to formalize the approach and possibly
 adapt it to Scala.

Formalizing D purity is probably possible, but it already has many special cases, and few more are coming (see Bugzilla on this)!

Formalising it is not hard, but the D implementation will have to be fixed. Just decouple 'immutable' and 'pure' completely, int foo()pure{ int x; immutable int y; void bar()pure{ x++; // ok } int baz()pure immutable{ return y; // ok } int foo()pure immutable{ return x; // error } } then rename pure to somethingother and make pure a synonym for somethingother immutable and add that to Scala.
 Regarding cross pollination with Scala: despite I generally don't like
 lazy lists in high-performance code, in many other kinds of code they
 are very handy, as in Haskell, Perl6 and Scala (in Scala they are named
 purely functional lazy streams).

 If you take a look at Python/Scala/C# code that generates values lazily,
 the Range-based version in D is sometimes several times longer, much
 more easy to get wrong, harder to write, etc.

 This is Haskell code to test if just the leaves of two binary trees
 contain the same data, this code is lazy:

 data Tree a = Leaf a | Node (Tree a) (Tree a)

 fringe :: Tree a -> [a]
 fringe (Leaf x) = [x]
 fringe (Node n1 n2) = fringe n1 ++ fringe n2

 sameFringe :: (Eq a) => Tree a -> Tree a -> Bool
 sameFringe t1 t2 = fringe t1 == fringe t2


 Doing the same thing in D, using ranges, is possible, but the code is
 ten times longer or more:
 http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Same_Fringe#Strong_Lazy_Version

The translation is (spaces added for your convenience, you won't get me to use parens though): mixin ADT!q{ Tree(T): Leaf(T x), Node(Tree a, Tree b) }; DynRange!T fringe(T)(Tree!T t){ return t.match!( (Leaf l) => cons(l.x, empty), (Node n) => chain(n.a.fringe, n.b.fringe).dynRange, ); } bool sameFringe(T)(Tree!T t1, Tree!T t2){ return equal(t1.fringe, t2.fringe); } for suitable definitions of ADT, DynRange/dynRange, cons and empty. So those would be nice additions to Phobos. Obviously this would look even better: mixin ADT!q{ Tree(T): Leaf(T x), Node(Tree a, Tree b) }; DynRange!T fringe(T)(Tree!T t) => t.match!( (Leaf l) => cons(l.x, empty), (Node n) => chain(n.a.fringe, n.b.fringe).dynRange, ); bool sameFringe(T)(Tree!T t1, Tree!T t2) => t1.fringe == t2.fringe; The number of lines equals the Haskell example in this case. Interestingly, you have opened an enhancement request on this and then argued against it.
 Similar code is possible in Scala (and in this case most of the saving
 of lines of code doesn't come from pattern matching and algebraic data
 types, but from the good support for lazy lists/streams). This kind of
 code is very common, even when you aren't coding in functional style.

 --------------------

 So, these are the slides I've used (though of course they don't tell
 much of the story).

 http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/slides/Alexandrescu/2-D%20course%20parts%201%20and%202.pdf

Thank you for the slides. I hope we'll have the range-based min(), and argmin/argmax in Phobos :-) -------------------- At page 33: auto m = s.argmin!((x) => x.length); This isn't compiled with -property. So what's the right way to write D code?

There is no 'right' way. But this is the pretty way, the way you use to show off the language at a presentation (otherwise you'll get questions like: "that is all well, but what on earth is that second pair of parens for?")
 In Python to avoid that lambda there is a len() global function, that
 just calls the __len__ attribute/property of collections and objects. So
 an equivalent Python version is:

 auto m = s.argmin!len;

 Bye,
 bearophile

Sep 20 2012
next sibling parent deadalnix <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
Le 20/09/2012 18:39, Timon Gehr a Ă©crit :
 On 09/20/2012 04:23 PM, bearophile wrote:
 Andrei Alexandrescu:

 In particular, Martin has been quite impressed with our approach to
 purity and immutability. We are considering a collaboration with one
 of his students on a paper to formalize the approach and possibly
 adapt it to Scala.

Formalizing D purity is probably possible, but it already has many special cases, and few more are coming (see Bugzilla on this)!

Formalising it is not hard, but the D implementation will have to be fixed. Just decouple 'immutable' and 'pure' completely, int foo()pure{ int x; immutable int y; void bar()pure{ x++; // ok } int baz()pure immutable{ return y; // ok } int foo()pure immutable{ return x; // error } } then rename pure to somethingother and make pure a synonym for somethingother immutable and add that to Scala.

I proposed something similar in the epic delegate thread. I observe that thing fall together nicely with it on several topics. It seems like the way to go.
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent deadalnix <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
Le 20/09/2012 18:55, bearophile a Ă©crit :
 Timon Gehr:

 Formalising it is not hard,

I am not sure of this, given the amount of special cases it already has.

This is made for less special cases. Which is an improvement.
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 09/20/2012 06:55 PM, bearophile wrote:
 Timon Gehr:

 Formalising it is not hard,

I am not sure of this, given the amount of special cases it already has.

Which special cases do you refer to?
 The number of lines equals the Haskell example in this case.
 Interestingly, you have opened an enhancement request on this and then
 argued against it.

I am not against it, it's a nice syntax. But I think there are more useful things to change/add, like syntax to destructure tuples, that I need every 20 lines of code or so. When you put out many suggestions, I think it's important to specify what you think is more important and what's less important.

Well, => for functions is a trivial parser change, and tuple destructuring is already implemented. (but not pulled)
 There is no 'right' way.

So we don't agree even on what we have to agree :-)

I agree.
 And having multiple correct ways to do something is often bad :-(

Then we're fine. These are two notations for doing it the same way.
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling parent reply Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 09/20/2012 11:33 PM, bearophile wrote:
 Timon Gehr:

 mixin ADT!q{ Tree(T): Leaf(T x), Node(Tree a, Tree b) };

 DynRange!T fringe(T)(Tree!T t){
     return t.match!(
         (Leaf l) => cons(l.x, empty),
         (Node n) => chain(n.a.fringe, n.b.fringe).dynRange,
     );
 }

 bool sameFringe(T)(Tree!T t1, Tree!T t2){
     return equal(t1.fringe, t2.fringe);
 }

What's the purpose of the dynRange suffix here? (Node n) => chain(n.a.fringe, n.b.fringe).dynRange

chain has type Result. dynRange takes an arbitrary range and transforms it into a range with the same value/vs reference behaviour whose static type depends only on the element type.
 Maybe a "~" operator can be defined for such dynRanges, to avoid the
 chain().

Yes, that should certainly be done. (it can be more efficient.)
Sep 20 2012
parent reply Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 09/21/2012 12:51 AM, bearophile wrote:
 Timon Gehr:

 chain has type Result. dynRange takes an arbitrary range and transforms
 it into a range with the same value/vs reference behaviour whose static
 type depends only on the element type.

I see. So that chain() is the normal chain of Phobos :-)

Exactly.
 (But is DynRange a lazy stream/sequence? This is the most important
 thing, because creating an eager linked list is kind of easy already,
 and misses the main point of my "request".)

 Bye,
 bearophile

Proof of concept: import std.range, std.algorithm; struct DynRange(T){ property T front(){ return frontImpl(); } property bool empty(){ return emptyImpl(); } void popFront(){ auto u = popFrontImpl(); frontImpl = u.frontImpl; emptyImpl = u.emptyImpl; popFrontImpl = u.popFrontImpl; } private: T delegate() frontImpl; bool delegate() emptyImpl; DynRange!T delegate() popFrontImpl; } DynRange!(ElementType!R) dynRange(R)(R range)if(isInputRange!R){ DynRange!(ElementType!R) result; result.frontImpl = ()=>range.front; result.emptyImpl = ()=>range.empty; result.popFrontImpl = (){ auto newRange = range; newRange.popFront(); return dynRange(newRange); }; return result; } void main(){ auto r = iota(0,10).dynRange; auto t = [1,2,3,4,5].dynRange; import std.stdio; writeln(r,r,t,t); } To allow the definition of recursive lazy ranges, we'd also need a facility to 'delay' computation. I'll post a proof of concept tomorrow, by implementing eg. a lazy prime sieve.
Sep 20 2012
parent reply Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> writes:
On 21-Sep-12 03:27, Timon Gehr wrote:
 On 09/21/2012 12:51 AM, bearophile wrote:
 Timon Gehr:

 chain has type Result. dynRange takes an arbitrary range and transforms
 it into a range with the same value/vs reference behaviour whose static
 type depends only on the element type.

I see. So that chain() is the normal chain of Phobos :-)

Exactly.
 (But is DynRange a lazy stream/sequence? This is the most important
 thing, because creating an eager linked list is kind of easy already,
 and misses the main point of my "request".)

 Bye,
 bearophile

Proof of concept: import std.range, std.algorithm; struct DynRange(T){ property T front(){ return frontImpl(); } property bool empty(){ return emptyImpl(); } void popFront(){ auto u = popFrontImpl(); frontImpl = u.frontImpl; emptyImpl = u.emptyImpl; popFrontImpl = u.popFrontImpl; } private: T delegate() frontImpl; bool delegate() emptyImpl; DynRange!T delegate() popFrontImpl; } DynRange!(ElementType!R) dynRange(R)(R range)if(isInputRange!R){ DynRange!(ElementType!R) result; result.frontImpl = ()=>range.front; result.emptyImpl = ()=>range.empty; result.popFrontImpl = (){ auto newRange = range; newRange.popFront(); return dynRange(newRange); }; return result; } void main(){ auto r = iota(0,10).dynRange; auto t = [1,2,3,4,5].dynRange; import std.stdio; writeln(r,r,t,t); } To allow the definition of recursive lazy ranges, we'd also need a facility to 'delay' computation. I'll post a proof of concept tomorrow, by implementing eg. a lazy prime sieve.

I swear I've seen it somewhere in Phobos: http://dlang.org/phobos/std_range.html#InputRangeObject and friends. Maybe we ought to lay a better infrastructure for it. -- Dmitry Olshansky
Sep 21 2012
parent Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 09/21/2012 07:46 PM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
 On 21-Sep-12 03:27, Timon Gehr wrote:
 On 09/21/2012 12:51 AM, bearophile wrote:
 Timon Gehr:

 chain has type Result. dynRange takes an arbitrary range and transforms
 it into a range with the same value/vs reference behaviour whose static
 type depends only on the element type.

I see. So that chain() is the normal chain of Phobos :-)

Exactly.
 (But is DynRange a lazy stream/sequence? This is the most important
 thing, because creating an eager linked list is kind of easy already,
 and misses the main point of my "request".)

 Bye,
 bearophile

Proof of concept: import std.range, std.algorithm; struct DynRange(T){ property T front(){ return frontImpl(); } property bool empty(){ return emptyImpl(); } void popFront(){ auto u = popFrontImpl(); frontImpl = u.frontImpl; emptyImpl = u.emptyImpl; popFrontImpl = u.popFrontImpl; } private: T delegate() frontImpl; bool delegate() emptyImpl; DynRange!T delegate() popFrontImpl; } DynRange!(ElementType!R) dynRange(R)(R range)if(isInputRange!R){ DynRange!(ElementType!R) result; result.frontImpl = ()=>range.front; result.emptyImpl = ()=>range.empty; result.popFrontImpl = (){ auto newRange = range; newRange.popFront(); return dynRange(newRange); }; return result; } void main(){ auto r = iota(0,10).dynRange; auto t = [1,2,3,4,5].dynRange; import std.stdio; writeln(r,r,t,t); } To allow the definition of recursive lazy ranges, we'd also need a facility to 'delay' computation. I'll post a proof of concept tomorrow, by implementing eg. a lazy prime sieve.

I swear I've seen it somewhere in Phobos: http://dlang.org/phobos/std_range.html#InputRangeObject and friends. Maybe we ought to lay a better infrastructure for it.

(Assuming you relate to the range part, and not the delay part.) I am aware of that. That one is unusable in its current state. import std.range; void main(){ auto r = iota(0,10).inputRangeObject; auto t = [1,2,3,4,5].inputRangeObject; import std.stdio; writeln(r,r,t,t); // [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9][][1,2,3,4,5][] } Yes, I could use 'save' everywhere, but I really do not want to. The 'dynamic' range should behave the same as the one exposing the full static type. It shouldn't be made so easy to make aliasing-related errors.
Sep 21 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "David Nadlinger" <see klickverbot.at> writes:
Bummer that they didn't hold the event in Zurich – maybe I 
would have managed to sneak in… ;)

On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 12:56:44 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:
 http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/slides/Alexandrescu/2-D%20course%20parts%201%20and%202.pdf

The code on slide 6 contains an issue resp. inaccuracy: Not all random access ranges are sliceable. Sometimes I wonder (and this is not at all intended as a snide remark!) if it is too easy to make mistakes regarding template constraints, if even you as the (co-?) designer of std.range get them wrong occasionally. David
Sep 20 2012
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/20/12 11:06 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
 Bummer that they didn't hold the event in Zurich – maybe I would have
 managed to sneak in… ;)

 On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 12:56:44 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 http://laser.inf.ethz.ch/2012/slides/Alexandrescu/2-D%20course%20parts%201%20and%202.pdf

The code on slide 6 contains an issue resp. inaccuracy: Not all random access ranges are sliceable. Sometimes I wonder (and this is not at all intended as a snide remark!) if it is too easy to make mistakes regarding template constraints, if even you as the (co-?) designer of std.range get them wrong occasionally.

In fairness, this issue is in the air at this time. We're still mulling over on characterizing infinite ranges that offer random access. Andrei
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Timon Gehr:

 Formalising it is not hard,

I am not sure of this, given the amount of special cases it already has.
 The number of lines equals the Haskell example in this case.
 Interestingly, you have opened an enhancement request on this 
 and then argued against it.

I am not against it, it's a nice syntax. But I think there are more useful things to change/add, like syntax to destructure tuples, that I need every 20 lines of code or so. When you put out many suggestions, I think it's important to specify what you think is more important and what's less important.
 There is no 'right' way.

So we don't agree even on what we have to agree :-) And having multiple correct ways to do something is often bad :-( Bye, bearophile
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Timon Gehr:

 mixin ADT!q{ Tree(T): Leaf(T x), Node(Tree a, Tree b) };

 DynRange!T fringe(T)(Tree!T t){
     return t.match!(
         (Leaf l) => cons(l.x, empty),
         (Node n) => chain(n.a.fringe, n.b.fringe).dynRange,
     );
 }

 bool sameFringe(T)(Tree!T t1, Tree!T t2){
     return equal(t1.fringe, t2.fringe);
 }

 for suitable definitions of ADT, DynRange/dynRange, cons and 
 empty.  So
 those would be nice additions to Phobos. Obviously this would 
 look even
 better:

 mixin ADT!q{ Tree(T): Leaf(T x), Node(Tree a, Tree b) };

 DynRange!T fringe(T)(Tree!T t) => t.match!(
     (Leaf l) => cons(l.x, empty),
     (Node n) => chain(n.a.fringe, n.b.fringe).dynRange,
 );

 bool sameFringe(T)(Tree!T t1, Tree!T t2) => t1.fringe == 
 t2.fringe;

And thank you for the code example. Bye, bearophile
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Timon Gehr:

 mixin ADT!q{ Tree(T): Leaf(T x), Node(Tree a, Tree b) };

 DynRange!T fringe(T)(Tree!T t){
     return t.match!(
         (Leaf l) => cons(l.x, empty),
         (Node n) => chain(n.a.fringe, n.b.fringe).dynRange,
     );
 }

 bool sameFringe(T)(Tree!T t1, Tree!T t2){
     return equal(t1.fringe, t2.fringe);
 }

What's the purpose of the dynRange suffix here? (Node n) => chain(n.a.fringe, n.b.fringe).dynRange Maybe a "~" operator can be defined for such dynRanges, to avoid the chain(). Bye, bearophile
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "renoX" <renozyx gmail.com> writes:
Thank for these slides.

I didn't get some part of the VRP slides: p40 of the third lesson:
byte a, b, c;
a = 1;
b = c | a; // error
Is-this really an error? A binary-or operation on bytes should 
return a byte..

BR,
renoX
Sep 20 2012
next sibling parent Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 09/21/2012 12:03 AM, renoX wrote:
 Thank for these slides.

 I didn't get some part of the VRP slides: p40 of the third lesson:
 byte a, b, c;
 a = 1;
 b = c | a; // error
 Is-this really an error? A binary-or operation on bytes should return a
 byte..

 BR,
 renoX

The result is an int but value range propagation makes it compile. The slide seems to be in error.
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/20/12 6:03 PM, renoX wrote:
 Thank for these slides.

 I didn't get some part of the VRP slides: p40 of the third lesson:
 byte a, b, c;
 a = 1;
 b = c | a; // error
 Is-this really an error? A binary-or operation on bytes should return a
 byte..

 BR,
 renoX

Yes, it's a bug in the slides. Thanks! A correct example would be: byte a, b; int c = 1; b = c | a; Andrei
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 17:06:19 +0200
"David Nadlinger" <see klickverbot.at> wrote:
 
 The code on slide 6 contains an issue resp. inaccuracy: Not all 
 random access ranges are sliceable. Sometimes I wonder (and this 
 is not at all intended as a snide remark!) if it is too easy to 
 make mistakes regarding template constraints, if even you as the 
 (co-?) designer of std.range get them wrong occasionally.
 

Maybe we could have an interface tester: Something that will automatically try to pass in a bunch of known types to whatever templated function you give it (and maybe a limited subset of combinations for multiple args), and makes sure the the result is always either "Compiles OK" or "Match not found", and never a compile error from *inside* the given function template. When it compiles OK, maybe it could even automatically run associated unittests (not sure though). I don't know that this could be done as a library, as it would require distinguishing between different types of compile errors. But I bet it could reasonably be done as a CLI tool that invokes DMD.
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Timon Gehr:

 chain has type Result. dynRange takes an arbitrary range and 
 transforms
 it into a range with the same value/vs reference behaviour 
 whose static
 type depends only on the element type.

I see. So that chain() is the normal chain of Phobos :-) (But is DynRange a lazy stream/sequence? This is the most important thing, because creating an eager linked list is kind of easy already, and misses the main point of my "request".) Bye, bearophile
Sep 20 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent "renoX" <renozyx gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 21 September 2012 at 04:56:04 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
 On 9/20/12 6:03 PM, renoX wrote:
 Thank for these slides.

 I didn't get some part of the VRP slides: p40 of the third 
 lesson:
 byte a, b, c;
 a = 1;
 b = c | a; // error
 Is-this really an error? A binary-or operation on bytes should 
 return a
 byte..

 BR,
 renoX

Yes, it's a bug in the slides. Thanks! A correct example would be: byte a, b; int c = 1; b = c | a; Andrei

Ah, I understand better now. Thanks for your reply. BR, renoX
Sep 21 2012
prev sibling parent "Simen Kjaeraas" <simen.kjaras gmail.com> writes:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 05:58:21 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 On 9/20/12 10:06 AM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
 Cool. And now the inevitable: Will there be video?

No video was taken. Andrei

*sadface* -- Simen
Sep 21 2012