www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.learn - What is the meaning of future ?

reply Elmar <chrehme gmx.de> writes:
Hello D community.

I was browsing the `__traits` keywords and I found `isFuture` 
whose descriptions says something about ` future`-annotated 
variables.

[link](https://dlang.org/spec/traits.html#isFuture)

I didn't find anything about ` future` for the D programming 
language. I only found that this annotation is used in Apex to 
denote futures (a.k.a. promises) as programming concept.

Is this something which exists, existed, was abandoned early as 
an idea? I remember I had read that D uses a "fiber" library to 
provide coroutines and such.

Maybe somebody knows an answer for this.
Sep 16 2021
next sibling parent Stefan Koch <uplink.coder googlemail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 20:53:34 UTC, Elmar wrote:

 Hello D community.

 I was browsing the `__traits` keywords and I found `isFuture` 
 whose descriptions says something about ` future`-annotated 
 variables.

 [link](https://dlang.org/spec/traits.html#isFuture)

 I didn't find anything about ` future` for the D programming 
 language. I only found that this annotation is used in Apex to 
 denote futures (a.k.a. promises) as programming concept.

 Is this something which exists, existed, was abandoned early as 
 an idea? I remember I had read that D uses a "fiber" library to 
 provide coroutines and such.

 Maybe somebody knows an answer for this.


future means a name is reserved for future extension.
it's kind of the opposite of deprecated.
Sep 16 2021
prev sibling parent reply bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:
On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 20:53:34 UTC, Elmar wrote:

 Hello D community.

 I was browsing the `__traits` keywords and I found `isFuture` 
 whose descriptions says something about ` future`-annotated 
 variables.

 [link](https://dlang.org/spec/traits.html#isFuture)

 I didn't find anything about ` future` for the D programming 
 language. I only found that this annotation is used in Apex to 
 denote futures (a.k.a. promises) as programming concept.

 Is this something which exists, existed, was abandoned early as 
 an idea? I remember I had read that D uses a "fiber" library to 
 provide coroutines and such.

 Maybe somebody knows an answer for this.


It's just another "useless" attribute that the language has added 
before fixing any of the real problems :)

Basically it reserves a symbol for the future.

It's similar to creating ex. an empty function that throws an 
error or something like "Not implemented"

While I understand why it was added and what purpose it serves 
then I fail to see why that  was prioritized over actual issues.

It's solving an almost non-existing issue.
Sep 17 2021
parent reply Meta <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 10:31:34 UTC, bauss wrote:

 On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 20:53:34 UTC, Elmar wrote:

 Hello D community.

 I was browsing the `__traits` keywords and I found `isFuture` 
 whose descriptions says something about ` future`-annotated 
 variables.

 [link](https://dlang.org/spec/traits.html#isFuture)

 I didn't find anything about ` future` for the D programming 
 language. I only found that this annotation is used in Apex to 
 denote futures (a.k.a. promises) as programming concept.

 Is this something which exists, existed, was abandoned early 
 as an idea? I remember I had read that D uses a "fiber" 
 library to provide coroutines and such.

 Maybe somebody knows an answer for this.


 It's just another "useless" attribute that the language has 
 added before fixing any of the real problems :)

 Basically it reserves a symbol for the future.

 It's similar to creating ex. an empty function that throws an 
 error or something like "Not implemented"

 While I understand why it was added and what purpose it serves 
 then I fail to see why that  was prioritized over actual issues.

 It's solving an almost non-existing issue.


I think the main reason it was added is because Sociomantic asked 
for it, but they are of course not around anymore.
Sep 17 2021
parent reply Dylan Graham <dylan.graham2000 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 14:37:29 UTC, Meta wrote:

 On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 10:31:34 UTC, bauss wrote:

 On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 20:53:34 UTC, Elmar wrote:

 [...]


 It's just another "useless" attribute that the language has 
 added before fixing any of the real problems :)

 Basically it reserves a symbol for the future.

 It's similar to creating ex. an empty function that throws an 
 error or something like "Not implemented"

 While I understand why it was added and what purpose it serves 
 then I fail to see why that  was prioritized over actual 
 issues.

 It's solving an almost non-existing issue.


 I think the main reason it was added is because Sociomantic 
 asked for it, but they are of course not around anymore.


Off topic: what happened to them, out of curiosity?
Sep 18 2021
next sibling parent reply evilrat <evilrat666 gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 18 September 2021 at 08:02:13 UTC, Dylan Graham 
wrote:

 On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 14:37:29 UTC, Meta wrote:

 On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 10:31:34 UTC, bauss wrote:

 On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 20:53:34 UTC, Elmar wrote:

 [...]


 It's just another "useless" attribute that the language has 
 added before fixing any of the real problems :)

 Basically it reserves a symbol for the future.

 It's similar to creating ex. an empty function that throws an 
 error or something like "Not implemented"

 While I understand why it was added and what purpose it 
 serves then I fail to see why that  was prioritized over 
 actual issues.

 It's solving an almost non-existing issue.


 I think the main reason it was added is because Sociomantic 
 asked for it, but they are of course not around anymore.


 Off topic: what happened to them, out of curiosity?


IIRC they went out of business for inability to compete OR it was 
consumed by a another advertising company, there was a thread on 
a forum from Sonke about that event.
Sep 18 2021
parent =?UTF-8?Q?Ali_=c3=87ehreli?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 9/18/21 1:27 AM, evilrat wrote:


 IIRC they went out of business for inability to compete


Yes, but not Sociomantic but Dunhumby[1], who had acquired Sociomantic, 
shut down that business because of changes in the ad market.

Ali
Sep 18 2021
prev sibling parent reply Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy gmail.com> writes:
On 9/18/21 4:02 AM, Dylan Graham wrote:

 On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 14:37:29 UTC, Meta wrote:

 On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 10:31:34 UTC, bauss wrote:

 On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 20:53:34 UTC, Elmar wrote:

 [...]


 It's just another "useless" attribute that the language has added 
 before fixing any of the real problems :)

 Basically it reserves a symbol for the future.

 It's similar to creating ex. an empty function that throws an error 
 or something like "Not implemented"

 While I understand why it was added and what purpose it serves then I 
 fail to see why that  was prioritized over actual issues.

 It's solving an almost non-existing issue.


 I think the main reason it was added is because Sociomantic asked for 
 it, but they are of course not around anymore.


 
 Off topic: what happened to them, out of curiosity?


Google changed the rules for add buys. Which either killed their 
business model, or made them far less competitive than they were originally.

-Steve
Sep 18 2021
parent Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy gmail.com> writes:
On 9/18/21 7:49 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 add buys


"ad buys" of course :P

-Steve
Sep 18 2021