On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 10:46:19 -0500, Adam D. Ruppe <destructiona...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, 14 February 2014 at 15:34:16 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I think classes heavily depend on druntime, I believe Walter was indicating they would not be allowed (which trivially excludes class ==)

My problem with excluding them is that it isn't hard to bring in the druntime parts they depend on when you need it. It's not like writing a class is a hidden feature - you don't need the compiler to help you find places you used them, and the linker error about the missing functions are fine.

Then we can just provide class support in one module that you just start compiling in to opt-in to the feature.

Classes are typically written with an expectation that the GC will clean them up. I don't think you can just get rid of that expectation. A class written without the assumption of the runtime is a very different object, and I would be hesitant to name it 'class' in D.

I recommend not supporting classes, at least for now.


Reply via email to