On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 12:57:08 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
As a response to my last message in that thread, the changes
for classinfo generation is now ready to go in master.
Ok, I'll give it a test in the next week or so.
However I already have ideas for future implementation that is
not so naive when it comes to looking up fields to assign data.
How does a kind of tagging system sound?
i.e:
class TypeInfo_Class
{
@name
string classname;
@init
byte[] initializer;
}
I'm assuming this idea addresses the issue with porting druntime
and leaving some features unimplemented. If I understand your
intention, this looks akin to Rust's Lang Items feature
(https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/lang-items.html). Please correct
me if I'm wrong.
I'm not sure what you're envisioning here, so I'd like to hear
more. Would the user get compile-time errors if they used a D
feature that required a druntime implementation, but the
implementation did not exist?
Mike
