www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Better string mixins

reply Michelle Long <HappyDance321 gmail.com> writes:
The problem with mixing in code is that one has to manually build 
code strings like:

static foreach(k; X)
    mixin("int Var"~k~" = "~k~";);

which is error prone, ugly, time consuming, and harder to read.

Instead, I propose a simple extension:

static foreach(k; X)
    mixin("int Var k =  k;");


Here the   simple, or whatever symbol would be best, takes the 
variable and inserts it from the outer scope as a string, 
converting it to a string if necessary.

It can only be used on such CT variables so errors should not 
exist.

If necessary, maybe

static foreach(k; X)
     mixin("int Var k =  k;");

or

static foreach(k; X)
    mixin( "int Var k =  k;");

could be used.


This avoids having to do shit like

mixin("foo("~x~", "~y~", "~z~");");

so one has

mixin("foo( x, y, z);");

which translates almost directly in to standard code(one can 
simply strip the  's).
Dec 27 2018
next sibling parent reply Nicholas Wilson <iamthewilsonator hotmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 05:55:30 UTC, Michelle Long wrote:

 The problem with mixing in code is that one has to manually 
 build code strings like:

 [...]


mixin accepts multiple arguments, see the bottom of 
https://dlang.org/spec/statement.html#mixin-statement
Dec 28 2018
parent reply SashaGreat <s g.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 09:12:45 UTC, Nicholas Wilson 
wrote:

 On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 05:55:30 UTC, Michelle Long 
 wrote:

 The problem with mixing in code is that one has to manually 
 build code strings like:

 [...]


 mixin accepts multiple arguments, see the bottom of 
 https://dlang.org/spec/statement.html#mixin-statement




mixin("x = {0}", x);

More arguments:

mixin("x = {0}; y = {1}", x, y);

S.
Dec 28 2018
parent reply rikki cattermole <rikki cattermole.co.nz> writes:
On 29/12/2018 1:29 AM, SashaGreat wrote:

 

 
 mixin("x = {0}", x);
 
 More arguments:
 
 mixin("x = {0}; y = {1}", x, y);
 
 S.


No need.

import std.stdio;
import std.format;

void main() {
     int x;
     mixin("x = %d;".format(8));
     writeln(x);
}

Its hard to argue for syntax sugar when there is reasonable library 
code. Going to need to make a clear case argument for why this isn't 
acceptable. Otherwise a DIP for it would be rejected.
Dec 28 2018
parent reply SashaGreat <s g.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:34:27 UTC, rikki cattermole 
wrote:

 No need.

 import std.stdio;
 import std.format;

 void main() {
     int x;
     mixin("x = %d;".format(8));
     writeln(x);
 }


Yes, but for the second case it would be ugly...

mixin("x = {0}; y = {1}", x, y);

S.
Dec 28 2018
next sibling parent reply SashaGreat <s g.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:43:28 UTC, SashaGreat wrote:

 On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:34:27 UTC, rikki cattermole 
 wrote:

 No need.

 import std.stdio;
 import std.format;

 void main() {
     int x;
     mixin("x = %d;".format(8));
     writeln(x);
 }


 Yes, but for the second case it would be ugly...

 mixin("x = {0}; y = {1}", x, y);

 S.



could easily create a extension for this like:

public static Format(string this, object[] args){
     // Loop through all the {x} replacing with arg[x]
}

Then

"x = {0}".Format(1);

"x = {0}; y = {0}".Format(10, 20);

Is this possible with D?

S.






}
Dec 28 2018
parent JN <666total wp.pl> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:51:33 UTC, SashaGreat wrote:


 in could easily create a extension for this like:

 public static Format(string this, object[] args){
     // Loop through all the {x} replacing with arg[x]
 }

 Then

 "x = {0}".Format(1);

 "x = {0}; y = {0}".Format(10, 20);

 Is this possible with D?

 S.



function foo that takes a string argument first, you can either 
call it as foo(s, somethingsomething) or 
s.foo(somethingsomething).
Dec 28 2018
prev sibling parent reply rikki cattermole <rikki cattermole.co.nz> writes:
On 29/12/2018 1:43 AM, SashaGreat wrote:

 On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:34:27 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:

 No need.

 import std.stdio;
 import std.format;

 void main() {
     int x;
     mixin("x = %d;".format(8));
     writeln(x);
 }


 
 Yes, but for the second case it would be ugly...
 
 mixin("x = {0}; y = {1}", x, y);
 
 S.


mixin("x = %d; y = %d;".format(8, 4));

Looks ok to me, given that the original code was ugly as well (it can be 
improved as a multi-line string).
Dec 28 2018
next sibling parent drug <drug2004 bk.ru> writes:
On 28.12.2018 15:51, rikki cattermole wrote:

 On 29/12/2018 1:43 AM, SashaGreat wrote:

 On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:34:27 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:

 No need.

 import std.stdio;
 import std.format;

 void main() {
     int x;
     mixin("x = %d;".format(8));
     writeln(x);
 }


 Yes, but for the second case it would be ugly...

 mixin("x = {0}; y = {1}", x, y);

 S.


 
 mixin("x = %d; y = %d;".format(8, 4));
 
 Looks ok to me, given that the original code was ugly as well (it can be 
 improved as a multi-line string).


In practice your mixin string is more complex and format doesn't work so 
nicely. Sometimes you need to use one argument in several places in 
mixin string also. But for the case above it works nice sure.
Dec 28 2018
prev sibling parent Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:51:47 UTC, rikki cattermole 
wrote:

 On 29/12/2018 1:43 AM, SashaGreat wrote:

 mixin("x = {0}; y = {1}", x, y);


 mixin("x = %d; y = %d;".format(8, 4));


For a more direct translation, you would use positional 
parameters.

mixin("x = %1$s; y = %2$s".format(x, y));


You can write your own function to pretty easily convert between 
the two string formats if you want. (Or, if going that far, you 
can just write your own function that avoids `format` and just 
converts the args and inserts at position.)

Though these positional things are different than the 
interpolation request.
Dec 28 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Andre Pany <andre s-e-a-p.de> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 05:55:30 UTC, Michelle Long wrote:

 The problem with mixing in code is that one has to manually 
 build code strings like:

 static foreach(k; X)
    mixin("int Var"~k~" = "~k~";);

 which is error prone, ugly, time consuming, and harder to read.

 Instead, I propose a simple extension:

 static foreach(k; X)
    mixin("int Var k =  k;");


 Here the   simple, or whatever symbol would be best, takes the 
 variable and inserts it from the outer scope as a string, 
 converting it to a string if necessary.

 It can only be used on such CT variables so errors should not 
 exist.

 If necessary, maybe

 static foreach(k; X)
     mixin("int Var k =  k;");

 or

 static foreach(k; X)
    mixin( "int Var k =  k;");

 could be used.


 This avoids having to do shit like

 mixin("foo("~x~", "~y~", "~z~");");

 so one has

 mixin("foo( x, y, z);");

 which translates almost directly in to standard code(one can 
 simply strip the  's).


As far as I understand you propose a string interpolation syntax 
for string mixins only.

There is currently a DIP for adding general string interpolation  
to the language. Also there is a library solution available for 
string interpolation.

With string interpolation your use case will become quite 
readable and less error prone.

When the DIP is in a good shape there might be a chance it is 
added to the language. I just found a post of Walter where he 
express his open mind for this topic.

Kind regards
Andre
Dec 28 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 12/27/2018 9:55 PM, Michelle Long wrote:

 This avoids having to do shit like


Please don't use such words on the forums. We expect professional demeanor.
Dec 28 2018
next sibling parent reply John Colvin <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:09:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 12/27/2018 9:55 PM, Michelle Long wrote:

 This avoids having to do shit like


 Please don't use such words on the forums. We expect 
 professional demeanor.


I'm sure you're bored of hearing this, but workplaces aren't very 
uniform in expected demeanor across different countries, 
industries, companies and jobs. Playing on stereotypes: what 
might be normal behaviour for a sysadmin at an Australian games 
company would likely be horrifically bad behaviour for a 
user-facing tech support role in a German accounting software 
company. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think programmers swearing 
regularly is pretty normal at work in a lot of places.

Maybe there is another description of what you intend that would 
be more universal.

(To be clear, I think I understand what you mean by "professional 
demeanor", but I've been here a while and inferred from 
observation what you do and don't put up with, plus I guess a bit 
based on similarities between UK and USA culture)
Dec 28 2018
next sibling parent reply Jonathan Marler <johnnymarler gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 14:13:04 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:09:30 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:

 On 12/27/2018 9:55 PM, Michelle Long wrote:

 This avoids having to do shit like


 Please don't use such words on the forums. We expect 
 professional demeanor.


 I'm sure you're bored of hearing this, but workplaces aren't 
 very uniform in expected demeanor across different countries, 
 industries, companies and jobs. Playing on stereotypes: what 
 might be normal behaviour for a sysadmin at an Australian games 
 company would likely be horrifically bad behaviour for a 
 user-facing tech support role in a German accounting software 
 company. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think programmers swearing 
 regularly is pretty normal at work in a lot of places.

 Maybe there is another description of what you intend that 
 would be more universal.

 (To be clear, I think I understand what you mean by 
 "professional demeanor", but I've been here a while and 
 inferred from observation what you do and don't put up with, 
 plus I guess a bit based on similarities between UK and USA 
 culture)


This is just a guess but I think Walter is more sensitive to 
swearing because of his religious beliefs. I saw a video a while 
back that made me think he's Mormon. I was raised Mormon and they 
look down very much on swearing. Nowadays I just find it fun to 
use for emphasis and humor but I'm careful to only use it around 
people I know well and I know are comfortable with it. When I was 
Mormon I probably looked down on people who used it, so even 
though I don't think there's anything wrong with swearing, I know 
other people will judge you for it. With so many religious people 
in the world it's safe to assume someone's going to be offended 
by that language so it's best to avoid it if you want to Foster a 
well meaning and diverse community. Anyway, just thought I'd 
share my thoughts, could all be wrong but maybe it provides 
another helpful perspective.
Dec 28 2018
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 12/28/2018 6:46 PM, Jonathan Marler wrote:

 This is just a guess but I think Walter is more sensitive to swearing because
of 
 his religious beliefs.


No. It's about professional demeanor. It's neither hard to understand nor hard 
to do.
Dec 29 2018
parent reply Jonathan Marler <johnnymarler gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 29 December 2018 at 11:37:01 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 On 12/28/2018 6:46 PM, Jonathan Marler wrote:

 This is just a guess but I think Walter is more sensitive to 
 swearing because of his religious beliefs.


 No. It's about professional demeanor. It's neither hard to 
 understand nor hard to do.


Yeah, even though many people enjoy swearing, alot of people are 
offended by it, so it doesn't make sense for professionals to use 
it as a bit of humor or emphasis isn't worth the risk of 
offending people.

Based on your response Walter it sounds like you think you were 
mischaracterized. Just to clarify, I didn't mean to say that 
you're reason for wanting professionalism is because of your 
religious beliefs. Professionalism is self justifiable without 
religion. I was just seeing arguments about whether swearing 
could be considered professional in some situations (which it 
could be) but it's not going to be that way on these forums. 
Based on your beliefs, I think swearing would violate your 
definition of professional. If I was right about your background 
then that's not going to change so I was letting people know that 
debating this would be a waste of time. Plus, I think a public 
forum is too large of a group to ever think that everyone on it 
would ever be ok with swearing...the group is just to large and 
diverse.
Dec 29 2018
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 12/29/2018 9:26 AM, Jonathan Marler wrote:

 Plus, I think a public forum 
 is too large of a group to ever think that everyone on it would ever be ok
with 
 swearing...the group is just to large and diverse.


People in business are not interested in investing their time and money in a 
product where the people involved behave like children. They won't be offended, 
they'll just close the window and move on. They're not going to risk their time 
and money with such.

I don't care what people do in their office. But this is the D Foundation's 
office, and people here will comport themselves professionally, or will be
asked 
to shape up or ship out.
Dec 29 2018
next sibling parent bachmeier <no spam.net> writes:
On Saturday, 29 December 2018 at 21:57:12 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:


 People in business are not interested in investing their time 
 and money in a product where the people involved behave like 
 children. They won't be offended, they'll just close the window 
 and move on. They're not going to risk their time and money 
 with such.

 I don't care what people do in their office. But this is the D 
 Foundation's office, and people here will comport themselves 
 professionally, or will be asked to shape up or ship out.


Same goes for academics. I would never tell a student to post 
here. There's just no way I'd want to attach my reputation to 
what is considered okay by programmers in a random office 
somewhere.
Dec 29 2018
prev sibling parent reply Rubn <where is.this> writes:
On Saturday, 29 December 2018 at 21:57:12 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 People in business are not interested in investing their time 
 and money in a product where the people involved behave like 
 children.


Okay, but I'm not involved nor are a lot of individuals here, I 
have zero affiliation with the D foundation. Kind of difficult to 
tell how is and isn't, seems like it's partially a secret. The 
forums also don't have that kind of functionality. If I could 
guess or know someone's email I could probably impersonate them.


 They won't be offended, they'll just close the window and move 
 on. They're not going to risk their time and money with such.

 I don't care what people do in their office. But this is the D 
 Foundation's office, and people here will comport themselves 
 professionally, or will be asked to shape up or ship out.


Every office I've been to doesn't let anyone from the street walk 
around willy nilly. Yah you have bigger problems if you consider 
this an office.
Dec 29 2018
parent Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 30 December 2018 at 02:01:47 UTC, Rubn wrote:



 Every office I've been to doesn't let anyone from the street 
 walk around willy nilly. Yah you have bigger problems if you 
 consider this an office.


Then let's call it the D Community's office, as that's what 
Walter was getting at. Everything that happens here reflects on 
the community at large. When people wander in from reddit or 
elsewhere and see a bunch of flamewars, temper tantrums, and 
such, they won't acscribe it only to the participants, but to the 
D Community. We'll turn off those who are serious and fuel those 
who like to talk smack outside.

These forums have been around for many years now in various forms 
and have generally been decent because the people who participate 
agree to keep it that way. I count myself among those who would 
like to see that continue.
Dec 29 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 14:13:04 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:09:30 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:

 On 12/27/2018 9:55 PM, Michelle Long wrote:

 This avoids having to do shit like


 Please don't use such words on the forums. We expect 
 professional demeanor.


 I'm sure you're bored of hearing this, but workplaces aren't 
 very uniform in expected demeanor across different countries, 
 industries, companies and jobs. Playing on stereotypes: what 
 might be normal behaviour for a sysadmin at an Australian games 
 company would likely be horrifically bad behaviour for a 
 user-facing tech support role in a German accounting software 
 company. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think programmers swearing 
 regularly is pretty normal at work in a lot of places.

 Maybe there is another description of what you intend that 
 would be more universal.

 (To be clear, I think I understand what you mean by 
 "professional demeanor", but I've been here a while and 
 inferred from observation what you do and don't put up with, 
 plus I guess a bit based on similarities between UK and USA 
 culture)


I kinda agree with this.

At my company we curse a lot and not because we aren't 
professional, that's just our culture.

We're more like friends/family than just colleagues.

I do agree with Walter too that you should refrain from using 
such phrases if possible.
Dec 29 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 12/28/2018 6:13 AM, John Colvin wrote:

 Maybe there is another description of what you intend that would be more
universal.


https://www.amazon.com/Emily-Posts-Etiquette-19th-Manners/dp/0062439251

It's not that hard.
Dec 29 2018
parent Rubn <where is.this> writes:
On Saturday, 29 December 2018 at 11:33:54 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 On 12/28/2018 6:13 AM, John Colvin wrote:

 Maybe there is another description of what you intend that 
 would be more universal.


 https://www.amazon.com/Emily-Posts-Etiquette-19th-Manners/dp/0062439251

 It's not that hard.


"From social networking to social graces, Emily Post is the 
definitive source on etiquette for generations of __Americans__."

Guess that doesn't include me.
Dec 29 2018
prev sibling parent reply Ethan <gooberman gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 14:13:04 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 I'm sure you're bored of hearing this, but workplaces aren't 
 very uniform in expected demeanor across different countries, 
 industries, companies and jobs. Playing on stereotypes: what 
 might be normal behaviour for a sysadmin at an Australian games 
 company would likely be horrifically bad behaviour for a 
 user-facing tech support role in a German accounting software 
 company.


Can confirm that I've used the phrase "next level shit" at my GDC 
presentation.

Certainly what's considered professional in my industry (an 
entertainment industry) doesn't fly with classic white-collar IT.

(TIL that it's now classified gold-collar. Whatevs.)

Swears are fine where I'm from. Using swears to demean or insult 
someone doesn't matter, you're still being demeaning and 
insulting ie a dick. Don't be a dick.

Of course, I don't mind keeping it white-collar when I post here. 
I swear a lot in person, use blue-ish humour to get a point 
across. But on a forum, I have the luxury of time to think about 
how to say something in a clean manner.
Dec 29 2018
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 12/29/18 9:20 AM, Ethan wrote:

 On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 14:13:04 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 I'm sure you're bored of hearing this, but workplaces aren't very 
 uniform in expected demeanor across different countries, industries, 
 companies and jobs. Playing on stereotypes: what might be normal 
 behaviour for a sysadmin at an Australian games company would likely 
 be horrifically bad behaviour for a user-facing tech support role in a 
 German accounting software company.


 
 Can confirm that I've used the phrase "next level shit" at my GDC 
 presentation.
 
 Certainly what's considered professional in my industry (an 
 entertainment industry) doesn't fly with classic white-collar IT.
 
 (TIL that it's now classified gold-collar. Whatevs.)
 
 Swears are fine where I'm from. Using swears to demean or insult someone 
 doesn't matter, you're still being demeaning and insulting ie a dick. 
 Don't be a dick.
 
 Of course, I don't mind keeping it white-collar when I post here. I 
 swear a lot in person, use blue-ish humour to get a point across. But on 
 a forum, I have the luxury of time to think about how to say something 
 in a clean manner.


Thanks. That's exactly the spirit. (FWIW that talk was a riot and I 
wouldn't ask you to change it at all.)

We're trying to stay light on formal rules and rely on common sense 
among adults in a professional organization. The "but my organization 
does allow that" retort does not impose on the Foundation the least 
common denominator of all posters' respective organizations, and should 
not be used in an attempt to game the system. Just like Ethan, I'm 
convinced people understand and appreciate the variations across 
workplaces and what the middle road would be.

Happy New Year!


Andrei
Dec 30 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Neia Neutuladh <neia ikeran.org> writes:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 04:09:30 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 12/27/2018 9:55 PM, Michelle Long wrote:

 This avoids having to do shit like


 
 Please don't use such words on the forums. We expect professional
 demeanor.


Based on enforcement, I'd say it's a rule against swearing specifically. 
At my job, I can say it's fucked up that swagger-codegen for Java produces 
broken JAX-RS code by default, but if I responded to a coworker missing 
something in documentation by sending them a link to the Wikipedia page 
for confirmation bias, that wouldn't be acceptable.

On the newsgroups, though, the opposite is true.
Dec 28 2018
next sibling parent reply Paul Backus <snarwin gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 17:47:41 UTC, Neia Neutuladh wrote:

 On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 04:09:30 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 12/27/2018 9:55 PM, Michelle Long wrote:

 This avoids having to do shit like


 
 Please don't use such words on the forums. We expect 
 professional demeanor.


 Based on enforcement, I'd say it's a rule against swearing 
 specifically. At my job, I can say it's fucked up that 
 swagger-codegen for Java produces broken JAX-RS code by 
 default, but if I responded to a coworker missing something in 
 documentation by sending them a link to the Wikipedia page for 
 confirmation bias, that wouldn't be acceptable.

 On the newsgroups, though, the opposite is true.


"No swearing" is a bright-line rule [1] that's easy to understand 
and to enforce. "No passive-aggressive Wikipedia links", on the 
other hand, requires a certain amount of subjective judgment, and 
as a result has more potential to lead to misunderstandings.

When you have a relatively small group of people who all know 
each other, misunderstandings aren't too difficult to resolve, 
but when you have a large group of people, many of whom are 
complete strangers to one another, it can become quite difficult. 
So it makes sense that a public newsgroup, which is more like the 
second kind of group, would favor simple, clear rules, at the 
expense of nuance.

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/bright-line_rule
Dec 28 2018
parent reply Neia Neutuladh <neia ikeran.org> writes:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 18:39:40 +0000, Paul Backus wrote:

 "No swearing" is a bright-line rule [1] that's easy to understand and to
 enforce.


Yes. My primary complaint is that the rule is called "be professional" and 
is enforced as "don't swear".


 When you have a relatively small group of people who all know each
 other, misunderstandings aren't too difficult to resolve, but when you
 have a large group of people, many of whom are complete strangers to one
 another, it can become quite difficult.


Yes, maintaining a community is quite difficult.
Dec 28 2018
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 12/28/2018 12:00 PM, Neia Neutuladh wrote:

 Yes. My primary complaint is that the rule is called "be professional" and
 is enforced as "don't swear".


No, it is not. There have been many posts removed for unprofessional behavior 
that did not involve swearing.
Dec 29 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent rikki cattermole <rikki cattermole.co.nz> writes:
On 29/12/2018 6:47 AM, Neia Neutuladh wrote:

 On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 04:09:30 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 12/27/2018 9:55 PM, Michelle Long wrote:

 This avoids having to do shit like


 Please don't use such words on the forums. We expect professional
 demeanor.


 
 Based on enforcement, I'd say it's a rule against swearing specifically.
 At my job, I can say it's fucked up that swagger-codegen for Java produces
 broken JAX-RS code by default, but if I responded to a coworker missing
 something in documentation by sending them a link to the Wikipedia page
 for confirmation bias, that wouldn't be acceptable.
 
 On the newsgroups, though, the opposite is true.


Its not specific to swearing. Your usage of the word "fucked" here is ok 
for example. You're not using it as an adjective. Just stating a context 
for which it has been used in.

We do badly at it, but a large point of the purpose of that rule is to 
stop aggressive tones and hateful discussion. With insults going back in 
forth. For this reason it works rather well.

Either way, this is getting rather off-topic.
Dec 28 2018
prev sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 12/28/2018 9:47 AM, Neia Neutuladh wrote:

 I'd say it's a rule against swearing specifically.


No, it is not. Neither is it about religion nor my being offended.

If anyone has difficulty understanding how to behave in a professional manner,
I 
suggest:

https://www.amazon.com/Emily-Posts-Etiquette-19th-Manners/dp/0062439251

If you like, think of it as the D forum style guide. After all, we have a style 
guide for code submissions.
Dec 29 2018
parent reply bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:
On Saturday, 29 December 2018 at 11:56:03 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 On 12/28/2018 9:47 AM, Neia Neutuladh wrote:

 I'd say it's a rule against swearing specifically.


 No, it is not. Neither is it about religion nor my being 
 offended.

 If anyone has difficulty understanding how to behave in a 
 professional manner, I suggest:

 https://www.amazon.com/Emily-Posts-Etiquette-19th-Manners/dp/0062439251

 If you like, think of it as the D forum style guide. After all, 
 we have a style guide for code submissions.


I don't think anyone would be willing to read a book to post on a 
forum.
Dec 29 2018
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 12/29/2018 4:05 AM, bauss wrote:

 I don't think anyone would be willing to read a book to post on a forum.


Some books everyone should read. That one will pay off in far more
circumstances 
than this forum. Consider it an investment, like reading Martin's "Clean Code"
book.

https://www.amazon.com/Clean-Code-Handbook-Software-Craftsmanship/dp/0132350882
Dec 29 2018
prev sibling parent reply Rubn <where is.this> writes:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 12:09:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 12/27/2018 9:55 PM, Michelle Long wrote:

 This avoids having to do shit like


 Please don't use such words on the forums. We expect 
 professional demeanor.


I always find it amusing when people are offended because a 
particular word is used. Not even in the context it was used, 
merely that the word was used. I can easily and effortlessly say 
something much less professional without the use of such curse 
words. Someone interjected about my use of curse words in public, 
I insulted them in another language, and they were none the 
wiser. It's just a word, the person that gives it meaning is you. 
If you want to interpret the word in a way it wasn't used then 
that's on you. I find it funny radio and tv all have to bleep out 
these words when I can literally go on youtube and effortlessly 
find a video where they say "fuck" every 5 seconds without so 
much as a "i am totally this age and it is not made up so I can 
view the video" button. Oh how times change.

tabarnak eh, monsieur Walter
Dec 28 2018
next sibling parent reply Neia Neutuladh <neia ikeran.org> writes:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 04:17:07 +0000, Michelle Long wrote:

 Basically it means black... but we can't use it because it's "offensive"
 because some psychopaths used it. People are morons. Most of the time
 they have no direct connection to the word but just perpetuate the
 problem.


Vocabulary is used, on occasion, to indicate allegiance. This is 
arbitrary, but so are flags, uniforms, armbands, and gestures, which are 
also used to indicate allegiance. In this case, the word is used to 
indicate allegiance to an ideal of racism.
Dec 28 2018
parent rikki cattermole <rikki cattermole.co.nz> writes:
That's enough.
Lets get back to the topic at hand, string mixin's improvements.
Dec 29 2018
prev sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 12/28/2018 12:41 PM, Rubn wrote:

 I always find it amusing when people are offended


It's not about being offended. I'm not offended.

Would you pick up your date for the prom wearing track shorts? I wouldn't, 
either. On the D forums, I expect all to behave in a professional manner.

That includes the dlang github repository.
Dec 29 2018
parent Rubn <where is.this> writes:
On Saturday, 29 December 2018 at 11:44:16 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:

 On 12/28/2018 12:41 PM, Rubn wrote:

 I always find it amusing when people are offended


 It's not about being offended. I'm not offended.


Then what is the problem ?


 Would you pick up your date for the prom wearing track shorts? 
 I wouldn't, either. On the D forums, I expect all to behave in 
 a professional manner.


Who says you can't wear track shorts to prom? Who deemed that 
isn't acceptable? If you want to succumb to peer pressure, you 
can do so. But don't put pressure onto other individuals to 
follow your social norms.


 That includes the dlang github repository.


So if someone created a pull request and they included a swear 
word in the comment of the pull request, you would close it? I 
mean I know it would sit in the pull request queue until it 
becomes outdated someone needs to close it then creates a new one 
and reimplements it. But just hypothetically speaking, if you had 
the authority and were in charge of maintaining pull requests.
Dec 29 2018
prev sibling parent reply Dgame <r.schuett.1987 gmail.com> writes:
Hi, I've played around with string interpolation and wanted to 
ask if this is somewhat helpful?

https://run.dlang.io/is/6AokiH
Jan 02 2019
parent reply Bastiaan Veelo <Bastiaan Veelo.net> writes:
On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 18:59:53 UTC, Dgame wrote:

 Hi, I've played around with string interpolation and wanted to 
 ask if this is somewhat helpful?

 https://run.dlang.io/is/6AokiH


You are aware of `writefln`?


    writeln(fmt!("a = $a, b = $b, c = $c", a, b, c));
    writefln("a = %s, b = %s, c = %s", a, b, c);


These lines produce the same output.
Jan 02 2019
next sibling parent reply Jordan Wilson <wilsonjord gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 21:06:19 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo 
wrote:

 On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 18:59:53 UTC, Dgame wrote:

 Hi, I've played around with string interpolation and wanted to 
 ask if this is somewhat helpful?

 https://run.dlang.io/is/6AokiH


 You are aware of `writefln`?


    writeln(fmt!("a = $a, b = $b, c = $c", a, b, c));
    writefln("a = %s, b = %s, c = %s", a, b, c);


 These lines produce the same output.


This also produces the same output:
writeln(fmt!("a = $a, b = $b, c = $c", c, a, b));

 From what I can see, fmt removes the positional relationship 
between the vars and the format  specifiers, but you still have 
to supply the actual variables themselves as arguments, which is 
a redundancy that string interpolation in some other languages 
don't appear to have.

Jordan
Jan 02 2019
parent Dgame <r.schuett.1987 gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 21:52:06 UTC, Jordan Wilson wrote:

 On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 21:06:19 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo 
 wrote:

 On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 18:59:53 UTC, Dgame wrote:

 Hi, I've played around with string interpolation and wanted 
 to ask if this is somewhat helpful?

 https://run.dlang.io/is/6AokiH


 You are aware of `writefln`?


    writeln(fmt!("a = $a, b = $b, c = $c", a, b, c));
    writefln("a = %s, b = %s, c = %s", a, b, c);


 These lines produce the same output.


 This also produces the same output:
 writeln(fmt!("a = $a, b = $b, c = $c", c, a, b));

 From what I can see, fmt removes the positional relationship 
 between the vars and the format  specifiers, but you still have 
 to supply the actual variables themselves as arguments, which 
 is a redundancy that string interpolation in some other 
 languages don't appear to have.

 Jordan


That is correct, I might have been a bit hasty in sharing my 
little experiment.
Jan 02 2019
prev sibling parent reply Dgame <r.schuett.1987 gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 21:06:19 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo 
wrote:

 On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 18:59:53 UTC, Dgame wrote:

 Hi, I've played around with string interpolation and wanted to 
 ask if this is somewhat helpful?

 https://run.dlang.io/is/6AokiH


 You are aware of `writefln`?


    writeln(fmt!("a = $a, b = $b, c = $c", a, b, c));
    writefln("a = %s, b = %s, c = %s", a, b, c);


 These lines produce the same output.


Yes I do. But consider this:

int c = 3;
int z = c * c;

writefln("%s * %s = %s", c, c, z);

vs

writeln(fmt!("$c * $c = $z", c, z));

Just one c is applied. But I've disovered one slightly error 
here, the interpolation variables should be enclosed with { to 
prevent mistakenly replacement.

Also, currently no further "magic" as ${c * 2} can't be 
interpreted as someone might wish, it is somewhat static, but 
I've thought it might be interesting.
Jan 02 2019
parent Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy gmail.com> writes:
On 1/2/19 4:54 PM, Dgame wrote:

 On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 21:06:19 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:

 On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 18:59:53 UTC, Dgame wrote:

 Hi, I've played around with string interpolation and wanted to ask if 
 this is somewhat helpful?

 https://run.dlang.io/is/6AokiH


 You are aware of `writefln`?


    writeln(fmt!("a = $a, b = $b, c = $c", a, b, c));
    writefln("a = %s, b = %s, c = %s", a, b, c);


 These lines produce the same output.


 
 Yes I do. But consider this:
 
 int c = 3;
 int z = c * c;
 
 writefln("%s * %s = %s", c, c, z);
 
 vs
 
 writeln(fmt!("$c * $c = $z", c, z));
 
 Just one c is applied. But I've disovered one slightly error here, the 
 interpolation variables should be enclosed with { to prevent mistakenly 
 replacement.
 
 Also, currently no further "magic" as ${c * 2} can't be interpreted as 
 someone might wish, it is somewhat static, but I've thought it might be 
 interesting.


It's better, but still is not DRY enough. I still have to repeat the 
variable name. In terms of string interpolation, the point is to put the 
reference right at the usage, not to repeat it elsewhere. And as you 
alluded to, it's very key for string interpolation to allow arbitrary 
expressions.

-Steve
Jan 02 2019