On 1 February 2015 at 11:28, Johannes Pfau via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > Am Sat, 31 Jan 2015 22:37:19 -0800 > schrieb Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com>: > >> On 1/31/2015 9:21 PM, Mike wrote: >> > Is D's core team genuinely interested in this domain? >> >> Yes. >> >> >> > If you are genuinely interested, are you committed? And if so, >> > what direction would you like to take? So far, my ideas have been >> > very unpopular and I'm growing weary fighting the current. How can >> > I contribute in a way that gets us both where we want to go? >> >> I don't recall what you've suggested in this vein that was very >> unpopular - can you please post an example? > > Mike once complained that the runtime heavily relies on some high-level > OS features not available on embedded devices (e.g. threads). That's OK > if you actually have an OS, but druntime should be modular enough to > run on systems without thread support. >
The core library part needs some love in this respect. But I feel at least the rt and gcc library in GDC allow easier transition. For instance, I'm still happy at how gcc.gthreads is handled and how you can control the thread support at configure time - despite being only used in rt.monitor_ and rt.criticial_. https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/blob/61682dd6adada34bc5bbff5903954a6af45cca92/libphobos/configure.ac#L342 https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/tree/master/libphobos/libdruntime/gcc/gthreads Though it's clearly not enough, and I think there should be a push for more configurations here: https://github.com/ibuclaw/GDC/blob/9e03425dd5b3229d9333837631d19ad2d5c9b150/libphobos/libdruntime/gcc/config.d.in Iain
