www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.dtl - DTL 0.2 coming soon ...

reply "Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> writes:
I'm just waiting on some linker weirdies being divined by big-W.

Once that's done, I'll be mere hours (a couple of days at most) from release of
0.2. Currently slated for inclusion are:

 - D-like syntax for templates. (Less of the C++ influence <g>)
 - renamed collect() => transform()
 - renamed x_with() => xWith(), e.g. max_with() => maxWith()
 - Set class. Rudimentary as all hell - in that it uses a T[int] assoc array -
but it is a fully fledged member of DTL
(i.e.
 - containers will be able to derive from parameterisable interfaces, e.g.
IContainer!(int), which will make that
enumeration mode much more flexible
 - more general coverage of the various select() / transform() range operations
over the breadth of DTL containers.
 - auto generation of the pseudo-recursive templates. (With Ruby, of course.
<g>.)

I'm also hoping that one of the dfilter updates that've been posted of late
will enable me to Doxygenate them into some
rudimentary kind of help.

Future things, not to be included in 0.2:

 - "The DTL Vision" document
 - talking with Ben about how DTL and minTL might be merged
 - associative containers. How that exactly fits into the range stuff, I
currently don't know because I've not thought
about it. I'm sure it will though ... (famous last words??)
 - putting all the ranges "smarts" into mixins
 - persuade Walter that recursive templates should be allowed.
 - associative containers
 - performance profiling and optimisation
 - algorithms and the like, for interface-based enumeration
 - Iterators???
 - applying DTL aspects to "real-world" containers, e.g. std.recls.FileSearch


-- 
Matthew Wilson

Author: "Imperfect C++", Addison-Wesley, 2004
    (http://www.imperfectcplusplus.com)
Contributing editor, C/C++ Users Journal
    (http://www.synesis.com.au/articles.html#columns)
STLSoft moderator
    (http://www.stlsoft.org)

" I fold like a cheap hooker who got hit in the stomach by a fat guy with sores
on his face" -- Joey

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aug 18 2004
next sibling parent reply Norbert Nemec <Norbert Nemec-online.de> writes:
Matthew wrote:


  - persuade Walter that recursive templates should be allowed.


Are they not? One rather fundamental argument you might try: If you talk
about "meta-programming", this implies that you have a "meta-language". The
meta-language of D is a purely functional language, with templates being
the "functions" (executed at compile-time). Without recursion, a functional
language has to way to express loops, so I doubt it would even be turing
complete and deserve to be called "language"...

(Of course, this is a rather abstract argument, but it may relieve you from
having to proove that in your special case there is no way avoiding
recursion.)
Aug 19 2004
parent reply Gold Dragon <dragonwing dragonu.net> writes:
Norbert Nemec wrote:

 Matthew wrote:
 
 

 - persuade Walter that recursive templates should be allowed.


 
 
 Are they not? One rather fundamental argument you might try: If you talk
 about "meta-programming", this implies that you have a "meta-language". The
 meta-language of D is a purely functional language, with templates being
 the "functions" (executed at compile-time). Without recursion, a functional
 language has to way to express loops, so I doubt it would even be turing
 complete and deserve to be called "language"...
 
 (Of course, this is a rather abstract argument, but it may relieve you from
 having to proove that in your special case there is no way avoiding
 recursion.)
 


What I hate is that everyone here is 1000x smarter than me. Unless I'm 
not the only one.
Aug 19 2004
parent "Matthew" <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gold Dragon" <dragonwing dragonu.net>
Newsgroups: digitalmars.D.dtl
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: DTL 0.2 coming soon ...



 Norbert Nemec wrote:

 Matthew wrote:



 - persuade Walter that recursive templates should be allowed.



 Are they not? One rather fundamental argument you might try: If you talk
 about "meta-programming", this implies that you have a "meta-language". The
 meta-language of D is a purely functional language, with templates being
 the "functions" (executed at compile-time). Without recursion, a functional
 language has to way to express loops, so I doubt it would even be turing
 complete and deserve to be called "language"...

 (Of course, this is a rather abstract argument, but it may relieve you from
 having to proove that in your special case there is no way avoiding
 recursion.)


 What I hate is that everyone here is 1000x smarter than me. Unless I'm
 not the only one.


There is not a single software engineer in the whole world who cannot be made
to feel stupid (or at least lacking) in
three sentences from another.

Presumably you'd think that Walter and myself were both reasonably cluey chaps?
(I hope so, anyway!! <G>) Well I tell
you, there've been many times over the last couple of years when we've
discombobulated each other. That's just the game
we're in.

The days of the Natural Philosopher - when a man could know all of science -
ended 150-200 years ago. For IT, I would
say that those days went the way of the Dodo in the 70s. As it stands now, the
world of IT is so large, so diverse, and
so complex, that it is downright impossible for anyone, and I mean _anyone_, to
know but a small part of it.

So, worry not about your ignorance, for you're no more ignorant than anyone
else. Just keep learning, and learn the
lessons of your learning. :-)

Cheers

Matthew

P.S. Norbert's post impressed the hell out of me, also.
Aug 19 2004
prev sibling parent reply "Ivan Senji" <ivan.senji public.srce.hr> writes:
"Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> wrote in message
news:cg19b4$2sha$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 I'm just waiting on some linker weirdies being divined by big-W.

 Once that's done, I'll be mere hours (a couple of days at most) from


release of 0.2. Currently slated for inclusion are:

  - D-like syntax for templates. (Less of the C++ influence <g>)
  - renamed collect() => transform()
  - renamed x_with() => xWith(), e.g. max_with() => maxWith()
  - Set class. Rudimentary as all hell - in that it uses a T[int] assoc


array - but it is a fully fledged member of DTL

 (i.e.


T[int] ? really? Mine used int[T] but i swiched to T[].
Anyway, i'm looking forward to see set implemented as some tree (or
something simmilar)
with O(ln(N)) search and insertion times :)


  - containers will be able to derive from parameterisable interfaces, e.g.


IContainer!(int), which will make that

 enumeration mode much more flexible
  - more general coverage of the various select() / transform() range


operations over the breadth of DTL containers.

  - auto generation of the pseudo-recursive templates. (With Ruby, of


course. <g>.)

All sound great, except the last one (wich i do not understand)


 I'm also hoping that one of the dfilter updates that've been posted of


late will enable me to Doxygenate them into some

 rudimentary kind of help.

 Future things, not to be included in 0.2:

  - "The DTL Vision" document
  - talking with Ben about how DTL and minTL might be merged
  - associative containers. How that exactly fits into the range stuff, I


currently don't know because I've not thought

 about it. I'm sure it will though ... (famous last words??)
  - putting all the ranges "smarts" into mixins
  - persuade Walter that recursive templates should be allowed.
  - associative containers
  - performance profiling and optimisation
  - algorithms and the like, for interface-based enumeration
  - Iterators???
  - applying DTL aspects to "real-world" containers, e.g.


std.recls.FileSearch

 --
 Matthew Wilson

 Author: "Imperfect C++", Addison-Wesley, 2004
     (http://www.imperfectcplusplus.com)
 Contributing editor, C/C++ Users Journal
     (http://www.synesis.com.au/articles.html#columns)
 STLSoft moderator
     (http://www.stlsoft.org)

 " I fold like a cheap hooker who got hit in the stomach by a fat guy with


sores on his face" -- Joey

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


-----





 Aug 19 2004



  parent reply "Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org>  writes:


"Ivan Senji" <ivan.senji public.srce.hr> wrote in message
news:cg1th4$1les$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 "Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> wrote in message
 news:cg19b4$2sha$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 I'm just waiting on some linker weirdies being divined by big-W.

 Once that's done, I'll be mere hours (a couple of days at most) from


 release of 0.2. Currently slated for inclusion are:

  - D-like syntax for templates. (Less of the C++ influence <g>)
  - renamed collect() => transform()
  - renamed x_with() => xWith(), e.g. max_with() => maxWith()
  - Set class. Rudimentary as all hell - in that it uses a T[int] assoc


 array - but it is a fully fledged member of DTL

 (i.e.


 T[int] ? really? Mine used int[T] but i swiched to T[].


Maybe it's int[T]. I'd have to check. LOL!


 Anyway, i'm looking forward to see set implemented as some tree (or
 something simmilar)
 with O(ln(N)) search and insertion times :)


Absolutely. I'm not focusing on implementations at all until we get nearer DTL
1.0. At the moment I'm more interested in
interfaces, methodologies, etc. :)

Once we get to the performance-caring phase, I'll be plumbing the collective
knowledge base. One thing I'm very keen on
is that DTL kicks the arse of other generics libraries.


  - containers will be able to derive from parameterisable interfaces, e.g.


 IContainer!(int), which will make that

 enumeration mode much more flexible
  - more general coverage of the various select() / transform() range


 operations over the breadth of DTL containers.

  - auto generation of the pseudo-recursive templates. (With Ruby, of


 course. <g>.)

 All sound great, except the last one (wich i do not understand)


Basically, D doesn't support recursive templates.

Since DTL containers provide transform() (and similar, e.g. select(),
minWith(), etc.) methods, which filter the
contents of a container in the form of a "range" object. The range object type
for the transform() method is
TransformedRange().

Since a very important aspect of this is to be able to compose multiple
filters, the TransformedRange() template itself
provides the same transform() (and similar, e.g. select(), minWith(), etc.)
methods, it returns TransformedRange1().
TransformedRange1()'s transform returns TransformedRange2(). And so on and so
forth.

Since doing all that by hand is a total PITA, I'm doing auto-generated via a
Ruby script. (Or I will be, anyway, in a
day or so.)

Since I'm only doing 10 levels, there's a maximum composable depth of 10
filters. That sounds like more than we'd ever
practically need, and it is a lot certainly, but we may be passing these
intermediate ranges about other other
functions, so it's conceivable we might exceed that. In which case, I guess
DTL'd have to provide 20, 30, 50, 100,
1000?!?

Naturally, the only really elegant solution is if we have recursive templates,
and I hope to have help in ganging up on
big-W to that end. But for the moment I'll content myself with the hard-coded
(or hard-generated, anyway) solution.



 Aug 19 2004



  parent reply Gold Dragon <dragonwing dragonu.net>  writes:


Ok this I understand... somewhat (who the hell is Ruby and where can I 
find her? :) jk).

So you want us to beat the MAN down? I don't know, I have a lot of 
respect for a guy who gets pimped out by every other Joe in here 
(another joke, I guess I should stop before a mob is called upon me). I 
certainly don't know enough general programming but I know that 
recursive is always good (i've never personally did any of it but I can 
see how you can't use a for or foreach loop for a template (or can you?).

I'll bring a bat with a nail at the end.

Jacob Santos


 
 Basically, D doesn't support recursive templates.
 
 Since DTL containers provide transform() (and similar, e.g. select(),
minWith(), etc.) methods, which filter the
 contents of a container in the form of a "range" object. The range object type
for the transform() method is
 TransformedRange().
 
 Since a very important aspect of this is to be able to compose multiple
filters, the TransformedRange() template itself
 provides the same transform() (and similar, e.g. select(), minWith(), etc.)
methods, it returns TransformedRange1().
 TransformedRange1()'s transform returns TransformedRange2(). And so on and so
forth.
 
 Since doing all that by hand is a total PITA, I'm doing auto-generated via a
Ruby script. (Or I will be, anyway, in a
 day or so.)
 
 Since I'm only doing 10 levels, there's a maximum composable depth of 10
filters. That sounds like more than we'd ever
 practically need, and it is a lot certainly, but we may be passing these
intermediate ranges about other other
 functions, so it's conceivable we might exceed that. In which case, I guess
DTL'd have to provide 20, 30, 50, 100,
 1000?!?
 
 Naturally, the only really elegant solution is if we have recursive templates,
and I hope to have help in ganging up on
 big-W to that end. But for the moment I'll content myself with the hard-coded
(or hard-generated, anyway) solution.
 
 
 





 Aug 19 2004



  parent reply "Matthew" <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org>  writes:


"Gold Dragon" <dragonwing dragonu.net> wrote in message
news:cg3am5$2k41$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Ok this I understand... somewhat (who the hell is Ruby and where can I
 find her? :) jk).


Ruby is the hands-down best scripting language for people who wish both to use
(it's very good, maybe not better than
Python, though) and extend (no competition here; Ruby rocks) their scripting
language.

Check out http://www.ruby-lang.org/, though there are many Ruby sites coming on.



 So you want us to beat the MAN down? I don't know, I have a lot of
 respect for a guy who gets pimped out by every other Joe in here
 (another joke, I guess I should stop before a mob is called upon me). I
 certainly don't know enough general programming but I know that
 recursive is always good (i've never personally did any of it but I can
 see how you can't use a for or foreach loop for a template (or can you?).

 I'll bring a bat with a nail at the end.


Nah, just some reasoned argument and some parfait.

:-)


 Jacob Santos


 Basically, D doesn't support recursive templates.

 Since DTL containers provide transform() (and similar, e.g. select(),
minWith(), etc.) methods, which filter the
 contents of a container in the form of a "range" object. The range object type
for the transform() method is
 TransformedRange().

 Since a very important aspect of this is to be able to compose multiple
filters, the TransformedRange() template




itself

 provides the same transform() (and similar, e.g. select(), minWith(), etc.)
methods, it returns TransformedRange1().
 TransformedRange1()'s transform returns TransformedRange2(). And so on and so
forth.

 Since doing all that by hand is a total PITA, I'm doing auto-generated via a
Ruby script. (Or I will be, anyway, in




a

 day or so.)

 Since I'm only doing 10 levels, there's a maximum composable depth of 10
filters. That sounds like more than we'd




ever

 practically need, and it is a lot certainly, but we may be passing these
intermediate ranges about other other
 functions, so it's conceivable we might exceed that. In which case, I guess
DTL'd have to provide 20, 30, 50, 100,
 1000?!?

 Naturally, the only really elegant solution is if we have recursive templates,
and I hope to have help in ganging up




on

 big-W to that end. But for the moment I'll content myself with the hard-coded
(or hard-generated, anyway) solution.







 Aug 19 2004



  parent reply Regan Heath <regan netwin.co.nz>  writes:


On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:57:26 +1000, Matthew <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org> 
wrote:

<snip>


 Nah, just some reasoned argument and some parfait.


<quote>Everybody loves parfait</quote>

Regan

-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/



 Aug 19 2004



  parent reply "Matthew" <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org>  writes:


"Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> wrote in message
news:opscz92iu45a2sq9 digitalmars.com...

 On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:57:26 +1000, Matthew <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org>
 wrote:

 <snip>


 Nah, just some reasoned argument and some parfait.


 <quote>Everybody loves parfait</quote>

 Regan

 -- 
 Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


So've you also got Shrek-obsessed kids? (Or are you also a Shrek-obsessed kid?)

:-)



 Aug 19 2004



  parent reply Regan Heath <regan netwin.co.nz>  writes:


On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:03:30 +1000, Matthew <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org> 
wrote:

 "Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> wrote in message 
 news:opscz92iu45a2sq9 digitalmars.com...

 On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:57:26 +1000, Matthew <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org>
 wrote:

 <snip>


 Nah, just some reasoned argument and some parfait.


 <quote>Everybody loves parfait</quote>

 Regan

 --
 Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


 So've you also got Shrek-obsessed kids? (Or are you also a 
 Shrek-obsessed kid?)


Shrek is for adults too.. isn't it.. :)

Regan

-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/



 Aug 19 2004



  parent  "Matthew" <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org>  writes:


"Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> wrote in message
news:opsc0na7em5a2sq9 digitalmars.com...

 On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:03:30 +1000, Matthew <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org>
 wrote:

 "Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> wrote in message
 news:opscz92iu45a2sq9 digitalmars.com...

 On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:57:26 +1000, Matthew <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org>
 wrote:

 <snip>


 Nah, just some reasoned argument and some parfait.


 <quote>Everybody loves parfait</quote>

 Regan

 --
 Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


 So've you also got Shrek-obsessed kids? (Or are you also a
 Shrek-obsessed kid?)


 Shrek is for adults too.. isn't it.. :)


I'll let you know if/when I become one. :-)



 Aug 19 2004