On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 4:38 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov <e.insafutdi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bill Baxter Wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 4:28 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov >> <e.insafutdi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Bill Baxter Wrote: >> > >> >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov >> >> <e.insafutdi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Bill Baxter Wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 3:06 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov >> >> >> <e.insafutdi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > Finally we managed to compile qtd for Windows. But at the very last >> >> >> > step when compiling example, optlink crashed with a messagebox >> >> >> > containing X86 registers content. This seems to be a blocker for qtd >> >> >> > working on windows.. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Was this what you saw? >> >> >> "Unexpected OPTLINK Termination at EIP=0044C37B" >> >> >> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=424 >> >> >> >> >> >> Whatever it was, chances are good it's a known bug. So it would be >> >> >> good to figure out which one it is that you're hitting exactly. >> >> >> >> >> >> --bb >> >> > >> >> > Yes, it is this issue: "Unexpected OPTLINK Termination at >> >> > EIP=0041AFFD". And yes, there is 1 quite large file, 14k lines, but >> >> > because of forward reference and cyclic imports problems we can't split >> >> > it currently. >> >> >> >> Do you compile it with inlining on? Not positive about this, but you >> >> may be able to cut down on the number of fixups it needs by not using >> >> inlining. Which file is it, anyway? >> >> >> >> --bb >> > >> > it is qt/gui/QPaintDevice.d if you have it. It doesn't work with both >> > inlining and non-inlining. >> >> Ok. Is it some kind of automatically generated file? I don't see it >> in the qtd repo. >> >> --bb > yes, all files are automatically generated. If you wish I can upload > it(compiled binding with headers) somewhere.
No, that's ok. I was just curious. So it sounds like the best hope is to try to find some way to split it up some. There must be some way it can be broken up, even if that requires turning some private members public. No? --bb
