SilentLambda

3 ms·

1.
CobaltC Semantic Compiler(github.com)
3 points by SilentLambda 14d ago|0 comments
2.
by SilentLambda 26d ago
According to ChatGPT, the CobaltC language specification does now (since the spec was recently updated with an errata) provide sufficient syntactic, structural, and semantic boundaries to begin high-level compiler implementation planning, d
3.
by SilentLambda 26d ago
Yes, but remember is the last appendix to a book, and book provides the context for this appendix. So yes, in that sense, it's just another one attempting to address the memory-safety issues of C. At least this one uses C like syntax a
4.
CobaltC – The Successor to C?(strawberry9.github.io)
13 points by SilentLambda 26d ago|22 comments
5.
A theory for decades of C vulnerabilities(strawberry9.github.io)
36 points by SilentLambda 1mo ago|21 comments
6.
OpenD has private(this), so why won't D even consider it?(lists.puremagic.com)
2 points by SilentLambda 1y ago|0 comments
7.
by SilentLambda 1y ago
alert, inform, notify, announce ..... that's what HN does. How about refocusing your attention on the actual matter at hand. That is, Linus calling out Kees for being actively malicous. Personally, I would have contacted Konstantin pri
8.
by SilentLambda 1y ago
I think the HN title was completely appropriate. Linus was not jusy yelling - (i.e.): "You seem to have actively maliciously modified your tree completely." - Linus Torvalds. Linus didn't even use the word 'potentially&#
9.
by SilentLambda 3y ago
openD (a fork of the D programming language) makes class private members inside a module a reality for programmers. In the meantime, the D programming lanaguage forum bans any further discussion of private(this).
10.
OpenD Merges Private(this)(forum.dlang.org)
2 points by SilentLambda 3y ago|1 comments
11.
Futuer of the D Programming Language depends on finding the elusive self(digitalmars.com)
2 points by SilentLambda 3y ago|1 comments
12.
by SilentLambda 3y ago
Members of the D programming language spend 14 weeks searching for the elusive 'self'. Did they all find it though? And what about the 'non-self'? Did they go looking for that as well?
13.
by SilentLambda 4y ago
This D programming blog argues that C++ friend breaks encapsulation. I reject that argument, and say that C++ friend puts a door in the wall, and a guard at that door, and therefore encpasulation both remains, but is also extended (in the s
14.
Encapsulation – Where is the perimeter of a class type?(dlang.org)
1 points by SilentLambda 4y ago|1 comments
15.
by SilentLambda 4y ago
..and in the context of a module.. not even used as a type at all.
16.
by SilentLambda 4y ago
Would have been much better in my opinion, if D had maintained a C like struct (not a C++ like struct), and a C++ like class. That would have solved the problem you identified, while still allowing for the class to be what it was designed t
17.
by SilentLambda 4y ago
Yes, we can agree that D is not like C++ - not at all. The reason C++ programmers are usually disappointed, is because D gets marketed as such (it's the bait you need to get them to look at D afterall). In fact, even on the basic class
18.
by SilentLambda 4y ago
D is not at all like C++. D is D. You only need to compare how C++ and D treat a class type, and you know straight away they are miles apart (I prefer C++ in this regard). D has a subset, and that subset is more like C - pretty much cause t
19.
by SilentLambda 4y ago
.. you forgot to mention also, that (in the context of a D module) D stops treating a user-defined class-type as real type. Additionally, a D class is a reference type. Whereas in C++, a class type is a real type (treated as any built-in ty
20.
by SilentLambda 4y ago
"That said, D definitely has some advantages over C++, like more powerful metaprogramming, no need for headers, no uninitialized values and more. But unfortunately, these upsides are outweighed by the downsides." Yes, after workin