On Wednesday, 10 December 2014 at 18:16:54 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Wednesday, 10 December 2014 at 17:19:53 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
On Wednesday, 10 December 2014 at 14:16:47 UTC, Paulo Pinto
wrote:
Lots of options are possible when the C compiler and linker
model aren't being used.
..
Paulo
I don't see how symbol table information and relocation meta
data is sufficient to produce the correct object code if the
template parameters are unknown.
// library
void foo(T, U)(T t, U u) { t.tee(); u.uuuh(); }
// my code
foo!(ArcaneType1, DubiousType2)(a, d);
Simple, by dropping C based linker model as I state on my
comment.
--
Paulo
I don't care for the C based linker model. You'll have to
recompile the template, symbol table information and relocation
data is just not enough, in any linker model. So you'll need the
body of foo and you'll need to compile it at "link time".
What advantages of a hypothetical Pascal inspired D linker model
are left now?
If we just want to have binary, because binary, we could share
zipped library source and teach dmd how to unzip.
