On Tuesday, 26 February 2013 at 20:42:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 02/26/2013 06:09 PM, Dicebot wrote:
I like overall approach and think it really should be rule of
a thumb
for designing D features - defining simple bullet-proof
semantics and
making conclusions from it.
As opposed to syntax-based special case coverage.
...
Like it or not, that is what a compiler does.
Pardon me, how is compiler relevant here? Languages are designed
for programmers in first place, not compilers.
2) If you want to prohibit functions having an address, you
need a
section explaining communication with C in details in regard
to passing
function pointers.
That actually wouldn't change.
Why? Functions does not have an address according to this DIP.
How will you pass a callback to C code then, special case for
"extern(C)"?
