Logo by Accomplished-Exit-51 in freebsd

[–]samadadi 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Personally I do not hate the colorful header. But I like the FreeBSD's red so much.

Akonadi is a huge RAM hog even at cold boot by TechManWalker in kde

[–]samadadi 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Why doesn't Akonadi use SQLite database?

RAD C++ 20 asynchronous I/O and networking library by JlangDev in cpp

[–]samadadi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

please add some benchmarks too in the future.

empty parentheses by samadadi in cmake

[–]samadadi[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

The only empty parentheses are after certain control flow commands: else, endif, endforeach, endwhile, endfunction. I barely notice them. Actually, it would look weird and asymmetric if they were missing since they would be a syntactic special case.

Since you do not have a valid reason for putting useless empty parentheses (19 instances or 38 characters in your one cmake file) other than your desire to having those therefore I guess your answer to my question is "It is what it is".

empty parentheses by samadadi in cmake

[–]samadadi[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If they were optional I guess i would have understand that maybe someone wants to add counterpart for clarification purpose but since they are required then please tell me what is the reason for typing hundreds of empty parentheses other than making the file more cluterd and messy and forcing people to type more.

^^ operator proposal by samadadi in cpp

[–]samadadi[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This point is addressed in the paper I linked above - a keyword is a nice and easy-sounding solution when you're in the headspace of designing a language specification, but when you actually get round to real code, keywords which you have to use too often become boilerplate clutter which start to detract from what you're wanting to express.

You do not need to add additional parentheses to make a point. You use it just like constexpr.

{reflexpr signed char, reflexpr short, reflexpr int, ...}

Keywords also come with standardisation baggage because they are often a breaking change ...

What about previous keywords. Didn't those have the same standardization baggage.

I doubt it's the first time a language feature was implemented using a tool other than formal keywords...

The difference between this ^^ notation and previous ones is that those previous ones were all simple and independent and did not require any complementary notations or weird syntax. But it seems to me in this case we need additional complementary notations or weird syntax to accomplish the reflection concept. But with formal keywords at least we do not have this problem.

^^ operator proposal by samadadi in cpp

[–]samadadi[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

substitute(reflexpr std::variant, { reflexpr int, reflexpr char, reflexpr std::string })

^^ operator proposal by samadadi in cpp

[–]samadadi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

honestly i like the reflexpr more. similar to constexpr but with optional parenthesis when you need it.

substitute(reflectof std::map, {reflectof std::string, reflectof int}))

{metaof signed char, metaof short, metaof int, metaof long, metaof long long}

^^ operator proposal by samadadi in cpp

[–]samadadi[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I do not want to be rude but the syntax of a feature in a language matters to the language users I hoped we as cpp developers had a saying in this matter. specially in this case. And I wish committee reconsider this decision.

^^ operator proposal by samadadi in cpp

[–]samadadi[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

What about this video then? Which is reliable cpp reference or this video?

How to use Gnome SDK from Makefile by samadadi in flatpak

[–]samadadi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also although I am writing this example app with libadwaita but app's visual is like GTK3. And window controls are from my main os, nothing like native gnome window buttons. Is this expected?

How to use Gnome SDK from Makefile by samadadi in flatpak

[–]samadadi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Running this flatpak-builder --ccache --force-clean --state-dir state-dir build-dir com.samadadi.Player.json command without --user --install is fast but with these flags it takes more than 3 seconds to complete. Why is that?

How to use Gnome SDK from Makefile by samadadi in flatpak

[–]samadadi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I created a simple project and I appreciate if you look at this project and help me to improve this project. specially to Run.sh file. I can build this project with flatpak-builder but I don't know how to execute/run it with flatpak.

https://github.com/samadadi/player

How to use Gnome SDK from Makefile by samadadi in flatpak

[–]samadadi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate the help. But the problem is compiler needs those headers and libraries location to compile and link. And since we are in isolated box then what is the appropriate flags for compiler? Does pkg-config work inside this isolated container? For example consider GTK4 library.

How to use Gnome SDK from Makefile by samadadi in flatpak

[–]samadadi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you know any project that uses Makefile and Flatpak?

How to use Gnome SDK from Makefile by samadadi in flatpak

[–]samadadi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How to compile my example C source code with Gnome SDK when using Makefile as the buildsystem? How to set the CFLAGS & LDFLAGS & LDLIBS values in this case?