On Tuesday, 7 April 2015 at 08:25:02 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
See, the problem with this approach is that you can trivially get out of 1GB of memory with DMD even when compiling single module, all you need is to do enough compile-time magic. Separate compilation here delays the issue but does not actually solve it.

Yeah, absolutely agree. But at the moment separate compilation is the most "forgiving" one. Like, if it doesn't work - anything else won't work either. And given that personally I don't recognize the (possibly) increased compilation time as an issue, it's the solution that works for me.

If any effort is to be put into supporting this scenario (on-server compilation), it is better to be put in reducing actual memory hog of compiler, not supporting another workaround.

Agreed, too. The whole "forget about frees" approach sounds a little too controversial to me. Especially, after I have faced the dark side of it. So, I'm all for improving in that regard. But it seems like it's not recognized as a (high-priority) issue at the moment. So, we (the users) have to live with that.

Also you can still achieve the similar profile by splitting your project in small enough static libraries, so it is not completely out of question.

As I described, my project was just a couple of files. Building vibe.d was the actual problem. I don't think it is feasible to expect that a user of a library will start splitting it into "small enough libraries", when faced with this problem. A more structured approach is needed.

Reply via email to