Should we remove int[$] before 2.067?

uri via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sun Feb 1 13:03:17 PST 2015


On Sunday, 1 February 2015 at 15:36:04 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 2/1/15 2:00 AM, uri wrote:
>> On Sunday, 1 February 2015 at 09:46:45 UTC, eles wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whatever, anyway.
>>>
>>> Translation of that being:
>>>
>>> "Boring pedestrian issues like simple string logging are 
>>> bikeshedded
>>> for YEARS, yet PhD-level esoteric stuff makes it into phobos 
>>> with
>>> relative ease."
>>>
>>> https://github.com/klamonte/cycle/blob/master/docs/no_more_d.md
>>>
>>> cautios and determination, isn't? or, revolutionary and 
>>> conservative,
>>> how I did put it...
>>
>> +1
>>
>> At least decisions are finally being made on several fronts 
>> recently
>> though.
>>
>> W.r.t this feature, I was personally looking forward to it ... 
>> guess
>> I'll stick with the Octave/R/Python "troika" for rapid 
>> protoyping
>> numerical analysis code.
>
> Which feature are you referring to? -- Andrei

int[$] a=[1,2,3];

The syntax sugar helps when prototyping ideas, which is why R and 
Octave (MATLAB) are so useful. I have reservations about this:

auto a=[1,2,3].s

Because the type is hidden from the programmer... For my use case 
(prototyping code) it's a don't care but in production code it 
might be a problem, as others have pointed out already. I 
actually use this trick already in my own code for malloc'd 
arrays to avoid the GC and add sugar to toStringz.

All in all it is great to see some decisions been made. I think 
it will help shut down bike shedding and get D moving forward at 
a faster rate.

Cheers uri


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list