On 3/06/2015 1:33 a.m., ketmar wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jun 2015 22:30:47 +1200, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
* non-windows, as dll support on windows is still not here, i believe.
I've been able to do it a little bit already with my Web server. Haven't
hit its limit so far. In other words as long as exceptions aren't used
and its never unloaded, should be ok. Anyway, do you really think we
would get that sort of support for a couple of releases?
it seems that nobody on windows really needs that. ;-)
Indeed lets. But can we also not go modifying the language? I'm just
suggesting injecting of symbols that execute compiler side actions. Your
suggesting language changes. Even if it is a new pragma.
actually, no language changes at all. CTFE is already here, and it is
used in semantic analysis stage. there are no changes to the language,
besides adding some hooks and defining an API. it's invisible from the
user's POV and doesn't require changing of specs. now CTFE is started
explicitly, by using mixins and template evaluation. with my idea it will
be started implicitly when some condition is met. sure, that conditions
must be documented, but it will not change the language drastically.
Nope, it can be just another function call.
------
auto something(string text);
@something("...")
void another() {
}
------
Where something is specified on the compiler side.
UDA's + static assert imply compile time literals, which is what we want.
Something that is important to note is, these symbols like something
defined by the compiler should never hit the backend. If they are
referenced they should be forced to be called.
We really need to toy with these ideas properly and implement each. Then
its just a matter of time to convince the higher ups that it should be
merged.
yes, i believe that this is the best approach. implement both and let the
best solution win in a honest competition. ;-)
i don't feel very creative right now, but implementing that idea is in my
TODO list, and it's not at the bottom of list. so eventually (month? two?
ten years?) i'll write a PoC.
I think we want something very similar. We just haven't quite merged our
ideas just yet.
