"Ola Fosheim Grøstad" " wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Probably, at least without whole-program optimization turned on.
Linking with D is not a concern for whole-program-optimized C++ programs.
But you still have to track compiler version changelogs and then deal with
possibly multiple D implementations just fro one compiler. I guess it can
work out if you limit yourselves to just std::vector and std::string…
Yes, it's a pain. I've done it with one templated struct inside DDMD, and
that was a pain. I don't know if it will work sufficiently for mapping to
stl, but it's worth a try.
It's usually easier to test with multiple versions and manually determine
differences when problems arise. Changelogs often do not cover anything
more than API changes, especially with some vendors.
This idea would have a more merit if DMD was 100% LLVM based and focused
on one architecture… Doing this for many compilers on many architectures
sounds like versioning hell.
It would be easier, but I don't think it changes the merit of the idea.
Matching calling conventions is a much more difficult problem (in dmd's
backend at least) and yet interoperability is so useful that it's
worthwhile.
