www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Manifest constants using 'manifest' keyword?

reply Leandro Lucarella <llucax gmail.com> writes:
According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
but is definitely better than enum.

[1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be nice to nerds
Chances are you'll end up working for one
Dec 21 2007
next sibling parent reply Derek Parnell <derek psych.ward> writes:
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:07:03 -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:


 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.
 


I agree. Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
"what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

manifest 
{
   int Foo;
   long Bar;
}



-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
skype: derek.j.parnell
Dec 21 2007
next sibling parent jcc7 <technocrat7 gmail.com> writes:
== Quote from Derek Parnell (derek psych.ward)'s article

 On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:07:03 -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new
 'manifest' keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants.
 I really think he should went with alias or macro or with other
 better *existing* keyword, but is definitely better than enum.




Yay!




 I agree. Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like
 a noun rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying
 things like ... "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff
 like ...

 manifest
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


Well, there's always a learning curve with a new language. I think newbies will
be
able to figure it out fairly quickly by reading the documentation.

I think they'll find "manifest" a lot easier to understand than a reuse
(misuse?)
of enum would have been. (I thought that reusing enum was not the right way to
go
at all.)

I don't remember what my favorite enum-alternative was (as there were several
and
I wasn't paying attention that closely), but I think manifest was a fine choice.



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling  parent reply Matti Niemenmaa <see_signature for.real.address>  writes:


Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?

-- 
E-mail address: matti.niemenmaa+news, domain is iki (DOT) fi



 Dec 21 2007



  parent reply =?UTF-8?B?IkrDqXLDtG1lIE0uIEJlcmdlciI=?= <jeberger free.fr>  writes:


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


 
 Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?
 


	I'd bet for a compilation error ;) A correct declaration would be:

manifest
{
   int Foo = 42;
   long Bar = 4242;
}

		Jerome
- --
+------------------------- Jerome M. BERGER ---------------------+
|    mailto:jeberger free.fr      | ICQ:    238062172            |
|    http://jeberger.free.fr/     | Jabber: jeberger jabber.fr   |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------+
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHa/yUd0kWM4JG3k8RAkSrAJ93OOnhYr8qoDPAZHDC6dTkgBPNRwCfWDRu
xA5HZoo2pP2P4uThBvIuqTo=
=ifht
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



 Dec 21 2007



 next sibling parent reply Matti Niemenmaa <see_signature for.real.address>  writes:


Jérôme M. Berger wrote:

 Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


 Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?


 
 	I'd bet for a compilation error ;)


That wasn't my point. I get the semantics, I want to understand what the word
itself means.

"const" -> a constant, i.e. something you can't write to. Fine, though it's not
necessarily "constant" per se.
"manifest" -> a manifest constant. What's a manifest constant? A compile-time
constant. Why isn't it called "compiletime" then? What's with the word
"manifest"?

-- 
E-mail address: matti.niemenmaa+news, domain is iki (DOT) fi



 Dec 21 2007



 next sibling parent  Ary Borenszweig <ary esperanto.org.ar>  writes:


Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Jérôme M. Berger wrote:

 Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


 Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?


 	I'd bet for a compilation error ;)


 
 That wasn't my point. I get the semantics, I want to understand what the word
 itself means.
 
 "const" -> a constant, i.e. something you can't write to. Fine, though it's not
 necessarily "constant" per se.
 "manifest" -> a manifest constant. What's a manifest constant? A compile-time
 constant. Why isn't it called "compiletime" then? What's with the word
"manifest"?
 


I don't like the keyword "manifest" for that purpose either. My native 
language is spanish, and as a programmer for about ten years, I hear 
about the expression "manifest constant" for the first time in this 
newsgroup. In fact, "manifest" by itself seems to mean a whole different 
concept ( 
http://www.google.com.ar/search?hl=es&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=kt7&pwst=1&defl=en&q=define:manifest&sa=X&oi=glossary
definition&ct=title 
), while "manifest constant" does have the intended meaning. So at least 
for me, seeing "manifest" grouping a bunch of declarations seems pretty 
weird, unless it were "manifest const". :)



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling  parent reply Derek Parnell <derek psych.ward>  writes:


On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:01:08 +0200, Matti Niemenmaa wrote:


 Jérôme M. Berger wrote:

 Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


 Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?


 
 	I'd bet for a compilation error ;)


 
 That wasn't my point. I get the semantics, I want to understand what the word
 itself means.
 
 "const" -> a constant, i.e. something you can't write to. Fine, though it's not
 necessarily "constant" per se.
 "manifest" -> a manifest constant. What's a manifest constant? A compile-time
 constant. Why isn't it called "compiletime" then? What's with the word
"manifest"?


The adjective 'manifest' in this context means "something whose purpose or
meaning is self-evident". It is a fairly obscure usage of English and not
many native-English speakers would use the term except in academic circles.
It is certainly not in common usage by the average man-in-the-street.

-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
skype: derek.j.parnell



 Dec 21 2007



  parent reply Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com>  writes:


Derek Parnell wrote:

 On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:01:08 +0200, Matti Niemenmaa wrote:
 

 Jérôme M. Berger wrote:

 Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


 Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?


 	I'd bet for a compilation error ;)


 That wasn't my point. I get the semantics, I want to understand what the word
 itself means.

 "const" -> a constant, i.e. something you can't write to. Fine, though it's not
 necessarily "constant" per se.
 "manifest" -> a manifest constant. What's a manifest constant? A compile-time
 constant. Why isn't it called "compiletime" then? What's with the word
"manifest"?


 
 The adjective 'manifest' in this context means "something whose purpose or
 meaning is self-evident". It is a fairly obscure usage of English and not
 many native-English speakers would use the term except in academic circles.
 It is certainly not in common usage by the average man-in-the-street.


I think it's more like these meanings (from dictionary.com)

6. a list of the cargo carried by a ship, made for the use of various 
agents and officials at the ports of destination.
7.	a list or invoice of goods transported by truck or train.
8.	a list of the cargo or passengers carried on an airplane.

I.e. it's something that's embedded in the executable as part of its 
"cargo".  At least I think that's where the terminology "manifest 
constant" comes from.

--bb



 Dec 21 2007



  parent reply Derek Parnell <derek psych.ward>  writes:


On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:05:40 +0900, Bill Baxter wrote:


 Derek Parnell wrote:

 On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:01:08 +0200, Matti Niemenmaa wrote:
 

 Jérôme M. Berger wrote:

 Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


 Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?


 	I'd bet for a compilation error ;)


 That wasn't my point. I get the semantics, I want to understand what the word
 itself means.

 "const" -> a constant, i.e. something you can't write to. Fine, though it's not
 necessarily "constant" per se.
 "manifest" -> a manifest constant. What's a manifest constant? A compile-time
 constant. Why isn't it called "compiletime" then? What's with the word
"manifest"?


 
 The adjective 'manifest' in this context means "something whose purpose or
 meaning is self-evident". It is a fairly obscure usage of English and not
 many native-English speakers would use the term except in academic circles.
 It is certainly not in common usage by the average man-in-the-street.


 
 I think it's more like these meanings (from dictionary.com)
 
 6. a list of the cargo carried by a ship, made for the use of various 
 agents and officials at the ports of destination.
 7.	a list or invoice of goods transported by truck or train.
 8.	a list of the cargo or passengers carried on an airplane.
 
 I.e. it's something that's embedded in the executable as part of its 
 "cargo".  At least I think that's where the terminology "manifest 
 constant" comes from.


That would be the NOUN manifest and the adjective.

-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
skype: derek.j.parnell



 Dec 21 2007



  parent  Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com>  writes:


Derek Parnell wrote:

 On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:05:40 +0900, Bill Baxter wrote:
 

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:01:08 +0200, Matti Niemenmaa wrote:


 Jérôme M. Berger wrote:

 Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


 Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?


 	I'd bet for a compilation error ;)


 That wasn't my point. I get the semantics, I want to understand what the word
 itself means.

 "const" -> a constant, i.e. something you can't write to. Fine, though it's not
 necessarily "constant" per se.
 "manifest" -> a manifest constant. What's a manifest constant? A compile-time
 constant. Why isn't it called "compiletime" then? What's with the word
"manifest"?


 The adjective 'manifest' in this context means "something whose purpose or
 meaning is self-evident". It is a fairly obscure usage of English and not
 many native-English speakers would use the term except in academic circles.
 It is certainly not in common usage by the average man-in-the-street.


 I think it's more like these meanings (from dictionary.com)

 6. a list of the cargo carried by a ship, made for the use of various 
 agents and officials at the ports of destination.
 7.	a list or invoice of goods transported by truck or train.
 8.	a list of the cargo or passengers carried on an airplane.

 I.e. it's something that's embedded in the executable as part of its 
 "cargo".  At least I think that's where the terminology "manifest 
 constant" comes from.


 
 That would be the NOUN manifest and the adjective.


But pretty much any noun can be used as an adjective in English.  And 
often the two get so cozy that way they get a hyphen or just get stuck 
together:

"Look at that man who is part wolf!" --> "Look at that wolfman!"
"Can I borrow your rings that you stick on your ears?" --> "Can I borrow 
your earrings?"
"This is a noun that's used as an adjective" --> "This is a noun adjective"
"A constant that's in the manifest" --> "A manifest constant"

--bb



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling  parent  Derek Parnell <derek psych.ward>  writes:


On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:49:08 +0100, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:


 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
 Hash: SHA1
 
 Matti Niemenmaa wrote:

 Derek Parnell wrote:

 Until one gets to know what it means, "manifest" looks like a noun
 rather than an adjective. I can just see newbies saying things like ...
 "what is a 'manifest'" when confronted with stuff like ...

 manifest 
 {
    int Foo;
    long Bar;
 }


 
 Alright, I'll bite. What /is/ manifest meant to mean here?
 


 	I'd bet for a compilation error ;) A correct declaration would be:
 
 manifest
 {
    int Foo = 42;
    long Bar = 4242;
 }


LOL ... it was 2:30AM when I wrote that.

What I had in mind was the apparent similarity in syntax structure between 

 struct S
 {
  int Foo = 42;
  long Bar = 4242;
 }

and

 manifest
 {
  int Foo = 42;
  long Bar = 4242;
 }

But overall, 'manifest' is better then an overloaded 'enum' and, as I
expect what will happen, 'manifest' will be in very common usage. It also
helps in visually distinquishing the D programming language from C/C++.

It will do.

-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
skype: derek.j.parnell



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling next sibling parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com>  writes:


Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.
 
 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535
 


Ack!  The masses succeeded in influencing Walter and Andrei... thus 
proving me completely wrong!  Oh no! :)

That'll teach me about getting all philosophical. :P

mainfest is better than enum, at least, although I see they still chose 
something "different".  Looking good!

-JJR



 Dec 21 2007



 next sibling parent  "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com>  writes:


"John Reimer" wrote

 mainfest is better than enum, at least, although I see they still chose 
 something "different".  Looking good!


Yes, yes yes!  I am happy that we have a different keyword, even if it isn't 
the one I wanted :)

-Steve 



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Bruce Adams" <tortoise_74 yeah.who.co.uk>  writes:


On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:16:38 -0000, John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com>  
wrote:


 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think  
 he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.
  [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 Ack!  The masses succeeded in influencing Walter and Andrei... thus  
 proving me completely wrong!  Oh no! :)

 That'll teach me about getting all philosophical. :P


Poor Walter though. He finally breaks under the strain and changes his  
proposal only to have
yet another thread full of whinges (no offence intended) about the new one.
I guess that's the lot of language designers.



 Dec 21 2007



 next sibling parent  John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com>  writes:


Bruce Adams wrote:

 On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:16:38 -0000, John Reimer 
 <terminal.node gmail.com> wrote:
 

 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really 
 think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.
  [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 Ack!  The masses succeeded in influencing Walter and Andrei... thus 
 proving me completely wrong!  Oh no! :)

 That'll teach me about getting all philosophical. :P


 Poor Walter though. He finally breaks under the strain and changes his 
 proposal only to have
 yet another thread full of whinges (no offence intended) about the new one.
 I guess that's the lot of language designers.



Yep, the cycle continues.  Actually, it's not completely unusual that 
they acquiesce... it just doesn't happen that often (which is good, I 
suppose).  I think that this has just become the accepted design process 
for D.  It's really quite odd, but I suppose it just adds another flavor 
of design and engineering trends to the history books.

I don't think it's really something to pity anymore, since it looks that 
Walter has long since accepted this mechanism.

-JJR



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling  parent reply =?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22J=E9r=F4me_M=2E_Berger=22?= <jeberger free.fr>  writes:


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bruce Adams wrote:

 On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:16:38 -0000, John Reimer
 <terminal.node gmail.com> wrote:
 

 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really
 think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.
  [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 Ack!  The masses succeeded in influencing Walter and Andrei... thus
 proving me completely wrong!  Oh no! :)

 That'll teach me about getting all philosophical. :P


 Poor Walter though. He finally breaks under the strain and changes his
 proposal only to have
 yet another thread full of whinges (no offence intended) about the new one.
 I guess that's the lot of language designers.


	Well, *I* like the new one much better than reusing "enum" (which
appears to be a consensus in this thread so far). Even if we think
"manifest" is still not perfect, this is something I can live with
(and there will *always* be someone complaining that any given
keyword isn't the "best" choice, so as long as there isn't anything
actively wrong with it, we might as well keep it).

		Jerome
- --
+------------------------- Jerome M. BERGER ---------------------+
|    mailto:jeberger free.fr      | ICQ:    238062172            |
|    http://jeberger.free.fr/     | Jabber: jeberger jabber.fr   |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------+
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHbORhd0kWM4JG3k8RAt2ZAJ0eV+vJThoMLp5AvPPQwsGqUcru0wCfaP0u
e5jKvWFJkPrOzLVoX6h+9zk=
=exCP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



 Dec 22 2007



  parent  Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com>  writes:


Jérôme M. Berger wrote:

 	Well, *I* like the new one much better than reusing "enum" (which
 appears to be a consensus in this thread so far). Even if we think
 "manifest" is still not perfect, this is something I can live with
 (and there will *always* be someone complaining that any given
 keyword isn't the "best" choice, so as long as there isn't anything
 actively wrong with it, we might as well keep it).
 
 		Jerome


I liked using enum during the original debate, but 'manifest' sounds 
cooler, so I support that now.



 Dec 22 2007



prev sibling  parent reply "Kris" <foo bar.com>  writes:


JJR, "manifest" is something that anyone who used BCPL would instantly 
recognize:  http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-bcpl.html

- Kris




"John Reimer" <terminal.node gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:fkglce$t7l$1 digitalmars.com...

 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.

 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 Ack!  The masses succeeded in influencing Walter and Andrei... thus 
 proving me completely wrong!  Oh no! :)

 That'll teach me about getting all philosophical. :P

 mainfest is better than enum, at least, although I see they still chose 
 something "different".  Looking good!

 -JJR
 





 Dec 21 2007



 next sibling parent reply Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com>  writes:


Kris wrote:

 JJR, "manifest" is something that anyone who used BCPL would instantly 
 recognize:  http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-bcpl.html


Interesting.  How many of those are left?  (People familar with BCPL)

--bb



 Dec 21 2007



 next sibling parent  "Kris" <foo bar.com>  writes:


Probably all those folks who can happily explain why 'P' would be the 
"logical" successor to C, rather than D

:p


"Bill Baxter" <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> wrote in message 
news:fki2fs$rdq$2 digitalmars.com...

 Kris wrote:

 JJR, "manifest" is something that anyone who used BCPL would instantly 
 recognize:  http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-bcpl.html


 Interesting.  How many of those are left?  (People familar with BCPL)

 --bb 





 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling  parent  "Bruce Adams" <tortoise_74 yeah.who.co.uk>  writes:


On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 04:06:20 -0000, Bill Baxter  
<dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> wrote:


 Kris wrote:

 JJR, "manifest" is something that anyone who used BCPL would instantly  
 recognize:  http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-bcpl.html


 Interesting.  How many of those are left?  (People familar with BCPL)

 --bb


More than there were now he's posted the link :)



 Dec 22 2007



prev sibling  parent  John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com>  writes:


Kris wrote:

 JJR, "manifest" is something that anyone who used BCPL would instantly 
 recognize:  http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-bcpl.html
 
 - Kris
 
 
 


Ah... so they are going for the retro look, then? :)

Interesting about BCPL... thx for the link.



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling next sibling parent  Jason House <jason.james.house gmail.com>  writes:


Leandro Lucarella Wrote:


 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants.


It also looks like we lost the final keyword
(the definitions of stdin, stdout, etc have changed)



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling next sibling parent  "Janice Caron" <caron800 googlemail.com>  writes:


On 12/21/07, Leandro Lucarella <llucax gmail.com> wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.


Woo hoo!

That'll do me!
Thanks, Walter!



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling next sibling parent  Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com>  writes:


Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.
 
 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535
 


That works for me!  Seems a little quirky, but at least the meaning is 
not overloaded or being forced to mean something totally different from 
what the dictionary says.  And the historical nod to BCPL is very nice. 
  D is getting back to its roots while at the same time breaking new 
ground. :-)

(I personally don't see what all the fuss is about not making new 
keywords -- as long as they aren't tiny common words like "value" or 
"get" ... or "in" or "out" ... ;-) )


--bb



 Dec 21 2007



prev sibling next sibling parent reply Hxal <hxal freenode.d.channel>  writes:


Leandro Lucarella Wrote:


 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.
 
 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


I wonder if now that we have "manifest" meaning "taking no storage space",
it could be made to work for functions too (inlining every call to the
function).



 Dec 22 2007



 next sibling parent  "Vladimir Panteleev" <thecybershadow gmail.com>  writes:


On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:21:55 +0200, Hxal <hxal freenode.d.channel> wrote:


 Leandro Lucarella Wrote:


 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.

 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 I wonder if now that we have "manifest" meaning "taking no storage space",
 it could be made to work for functions too (inlining every call to the
function).


That would be great, but I think macros will do that better.
I think it's noteworthy that some languages like Delphi have an "inline"
keyword for functions (and it works across units/modules).

-- 
Best regards,
 Vladimir                          mailto:thecybershadow gmail.com



 Dec 22 2007



prev sibling  parent reply "Janice Caron" <caron800 googlemail.com>  writes:


On 12/22/07, Hxal <hxal freenode.d.channel> wrote:

 I wonder if now that we have "manifest" meaning "taking no storage space",
 it could be made to work for functions too (inlining every call to the
function).


Why would you want to do that? I don't see why the programmer should
need to know or care what gets inlined and what doesn't.



 Dec 22 2007



  parent  "Vladimir Panteleev" <thecybershadow gmail.com>  writes:


On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 19:08:37 +0200, Janice Caron <caron800 googlemail.com>
wrote:


 On 12/22/07, Hxal <hxal freenode.d.channel> wrote:

 I wonder if now that we have "manifest" meaning "taking no storage space",
 it could be made to work for functions too (inlining every call to the
function).


 Why would you want to do that? I don't see why the programmer should
 need to know or care what gets inlined and what doesn't.


1) The compiler can't know which code is in more need of performance - this
gives more control over performance to the user. Also, inlining doesn't just
imply copying the machine code - the function call is substituted at the AST
level, which means that it allows optimizations to happen across function
boundaries.

2) Sometimes it's very useful for security. Reverse-engineering a 500kb
function of mostly inlined cryphographic and mathematical operations is hell,
and doesn't have any substantial negative effects (the worst part is the huge
stack frame).

-- 
Best regards,
 Vladimir                          mailto:thecybershadow gmail.com



 Dec 22 2007



prev sibling  parent reply Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com>  writes:


Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.
 
 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


Sorry, that's going away.



 Dec 22 2007



 next sibling parent  John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com>  writes:


Walter Bright wrote:

 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.

 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 
 Sorry, that's going away.



wha?! ... :(

Oh well... as the world turns.



 Dec 22 2007



prev sibling  parent reply Daniel Keep <daniel.keep.lists gmail.com>  writes:


Walter Bright wrote:

 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.

 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 
 Sorry, that's going away.


And once again, digitalmars.D gets itself worked into a tizzy over
something that doesn't end up happening.  This newsgroup jumps the gun
so often, it's a wonder it hasn't been shot in the back.  Well, fatally
anyway...

:P

	-- Daniel



 Dec 22 2007



 next sibling parent  John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com>  writes:


Daniel Keep wrote:

 
 Walter Bright wrote:

 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.

 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 Sorry, that's going away.


 
 And once again, digitalmars.D gets itself worked into a tizzy over
 something that doesn't end up happening.  This newsgroup jumps the gun
 so often, it's a wonder it hasn't been shot in the back.  Well, fatally
 anyway...
 
 :P
 
 	-- Daniel



Woh hoo... this one was a doozy this time... wasn't it?  And I fell for 
it too! :P

-JJR



 Dec 22 2007



prev sibling  parent reply Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com>  writes:


Daniel Keep wrote:

 
 Walter Bright wrote:

 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.

 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 Sorry, that's going away.


 
 And once again, digitalmars.D gets itself worked into a tizzy over
 something that doesn't end up happening.  This newsgroup jumps the gun
 so often, it's a wonder it hasn't been shot in the back.  Well, fatally
 anyway...


If Walter would actually post a little more often about what was going 
on, or get someone else in the cabal to do so, then we wouldn't have to 
guess.

--bb



 Dec 23 2007



  parent  Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com>  writes:


Bill Baxter wrote:

 Daniel Keep wrote:

 Walter Bright wrote:

 Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 According to phobos changeset 535[1] I guess we have a new 'manifest'
 keyword to define manifest (to be redundant) constants. I really 
 think he
 should went with alias or macro or with other better *existing* 
 keyword,
 but is definitely better than enum.

 [1] http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/535


 Sorry, that's going away.


 And once again, digitalmars.D gets itself worked into a tizzy over
 something that doesn't end up happening.  This newsgroup jumps the gun
 so often, it's a wonder it hasn't been shot in the back.  Well, fatally
 anyway...


 
 If Walter would actually post a little more often about what was going 
 on, or get someone else in the cabal to do so, then we wouldn't have to 
 guess.


Or put another way:  Nature abhors a vacuum and this newsgroup abhors an 
information vacuum.  Whatever little leak springs in that vacuum will 
inevitably expand to fill all available space.

--bb



 Dec 23 2007