Errors in TDPL

[Alix Pexton]

On 21/06/2010 20:09, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Okay. I am in no way trying to say anything negative about TDPL. In fact,
> from what I've read so far, it's absolutely fantastic and quite possibly the
> most entertaining programming book that I've read in addition to being quite
> informative about D. However, no one's perfect (Andrei included), and there
> are bound to be errors in the book which didn't get caught.
>
> My thought was that we could point out any errors that we've found so that
> Andrei can get them fixed in future printings and/or we can find out that
> they aren't actually errors.
>
> The only errors that I've found so far have been omissions in the list of
> keywords on page 31. I'm listing them according to my understanding of
> whether they're still keywords, since I think that some have been removed as
> keywords or at least are no longer supposed to be keywords.
>
> Definitely should be there
> --------------------------
> immutable
> lazy
> pure
> nothrow
> shared
>
> I _think_ that it's supposed to be there
> ----------------------------------------
> cent
> ucent
>
> I think that they might not supposed to be keywords anymore
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> cdouble
> cfloat
> creal
> delete
> idouble
> ifloat
> ireal
> foreach_reverse
>
> Everything under "definitely" appears to be used in TDPL as keywords but not
> listed as them. cent and ucent aren't listed, but as far as I know are still
> keywords (albeit not implemented yet). The ones that are missing which I
> think have been removed are still listed in the online docs' list of
> keywards but not in the book. IIRC, the c/i floating points got moved to
> phobos; according to TDPL, delete was deprecated (though I hadn't picked up
> on that); and I believe that foreach_reverse has been deprecated in favor of
> using the combination of foreach and retro. So, TDPL is missing at least
> some keywords in its list, and the online docs have too many.
>
> In any case, I figured that it would be helpful if any errors in TDPL could
> be pointed out, since it could be helpful to Andrei and could be helpful to
> those reading it if the error isn't obvious. However, I certainly do _not_
> want to in any way indicate displeasure with the book. It's quite good. It's
> just that it does appear to have some errors in it that snuck through.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Good Idea!

I must admit I skipped over that table, didn't look overly interesting 
as tables go (><) but good catch!

There is only one mention of lazy evaluation in the index and it doesn't 
mention the lazy k/w at all. I seem to remember Andrei dislikes it, but 
also that there is another way to get function params to be evaluated 
lazily without using it.

immutable, nothrow, pure and shared are definitely oversights though.

I've not spotted anything D-specific myself yet, I'm not a particularly 
speedy reader ^^

A...