tanya, branch v0.16.0 GC-free, high-performance D library: Containers, networking, metaprogramming, memory management, utilities. net.ip.Address6.toString() recommended notation 2019-03-01T07:28:36+00:00 Eugen Wissner belka@caraus.de 2019-03-01T07:28:36+00:00 d7dfa3f6f14309327934fa846aed6a5c3b40dd6a Fix #65. 
Fix #65.
algorithm.iteration: Add singleton() 2019-02-25T08:27:03+00:00 Eugen Wissner belka@caraus.de 2019-02-25T08:27:03+00:00 8fd0452cd021219d809627146dc6651c8bc36901 ... iterating over a single value. 
... iterating over a single value.
range.adapter: new arrayInserter 2019-02-24T12:14:30+00:00 Eugen Wissner belka@caraus.de 2019-02-24T12:10:45+00:00 df99ea45f286430205dbc68d4437f123a9efb3ea 






format.sformat: Support range-based toString()
2019-02-19T05:39:39+00:00

Eugen Wissner
belka@caraus.de

2019-02-19T05:39:39+00:00

87ba58098efe46cf686c72fb927781dfd1a306d9












net.ip: Implement .toString() with output ranges
2019-02-16T07:37:45+00:00

Eugen Wissner
belka@caraus.de

2019-02-16T07:37:45+00:00

5a134ce7682c8ca16b17093bd332eda04a584223












range.adapter: Add container-range adapters. Fix #67
2019-02-16T07:36:50+00:00

Eugen Wissner
belka@caraus.de

2019-02-15T07:36:42+00:00

0835edce1d3c8bd2b09baa2b76d38efd3848027e












Use word-wise hash instead of FNV-1a for arrays of word-aligned scalars
2019-02-12T15:34:18+00:00

Nathan Sashihara
21227491+n8sh@users.noreply.github.com

2019-02-12T14:33:48+00:00

a786bdbec5575bcfad6435978755064e1be5e975

Also special case int-aligned scalars on 64-bit machines.
On a 64-bit machine hashing an array of pointers is now ~5.95x faster
with LDC2 and ~8.54x faster with DMD, and hashing an array of ints is
~3.34x faster with LDC2 and ~8.12x faster with DMD.




Also special case int-aligned scalars on 64-bit machines.
On a 64-bit machine hashing an array of pointers is now ~5.95x faster
with LDC2 and ~8.54x faster with DMD, and hashing an array of ints is
~3.34x faster with LDC2 and ~8.12x faster with DMD.






Add sformat() writing to an output range
2019-02-12T06:37:24+00:00

Eugen Wissner
belka@caraus.de

2019-02-12T06:37:24+00:00

0bef2ef76df51139d71083efa5eba175440347f0












Update dmd to 2.084.1
2019-02-11T21:14:59+00:00

Eugen Wissner
belka@caraus.de

2019-02-11T21:14:59+00:00

1d3d750adbcd99abbc34886e2afb6336e9410631












Deprecate InputRange source for OutputRanges
2019-02-06T06:26:28+00:00

Eugen Wissner
belka@caraus.de

2019-02-06T06:26:28+00:00

0c8f1eb4ce729a3967b5fa905f5999ab439e186a

An output range for E won't be automatically an output range for [E]
anymore. The same, an output range for [E] won't be automatically an
output range for E. Automatic E <-> [E] conversion seems to be a nice
feature at first glance, but it causes much ambiguity.

1) If I want that my output range accepts only UTF-8 strings but not
single characters (because it could be only part of a code point and
look like broken UTF-8 without the remaining code units), I can't do it
because an OutputRange(R, E) can't distinguish between char and string.

2) Here is an example from 2013:

import std.range;
import std.stdio;
Appender!(const(char)[][]) app;
put(app, "aasdf");
put(app, 'b');
writeln(app.data);

This outputs: ["aasdf", "\0"].
Whether it is a common case or not, such code just shouldn't compile.





An output range for E won't be automatically an output range for [E]
anymore. The same, an output range for [E] won't be automatically an
output range for E. Automatic E <-> [E] conversion seems to be a nice
feature at first glance, but it causes much ambiguity.

1) If I want that my output range accepts only UTF-8 strings but not
single characters (because it could be only part of a code point and
look like broken UTF-8 without the remaining code units), I can't do it
because an OutputRange(R, E) can't distinguish between char and string.

2) Here is an example from 2013:

import std.range;
import std.stdio;
Appender!(const(char)[][]) app;
put(app, "aasdf");
put(app, 'b');
writeln(app.data);

This outputs: ["aasdf", "\0"].
Whether it is a common case or not, such code just shouldn't compile.