On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 00:04:54 UTC, sarn wrote:
I thought I'd write something up to help other people
experiment with this stuff:
https://theartofmachinery.com/2016/12/18/d_without_runtime.html
Thanks for this.
I abandoned D sometime ago largely because of
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14758 (but there were
other reasons), so your blog post is interesting to me. It is
unfortunate that we have to resort to such hackery, but its nice
to have such tools at our disposal regardless.
I proposed another idea for giving users more control over D
Runtime by moving runtime hook definitions to .di header files.
If you're interested, you can read about it here:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/[email protected].
I'd much rather have something like that over a -betterC; you
can read more about some disadvantages to expanding on -betterC
(e.g. removing RTTI) here:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/[email protected].
I've largely embraced Rust now for its "no runtime" and "no
dependencies libcore" features (and a few other safety/robustness
features), but I miss the modeling power and compile-time
features of D greatly.
Anyway, thanks for the post; it's given me a few ideas.
Mike
