On 10-Aug-2015 13:22, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
On 10/08/2015 9:48 p.m., ketmar wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:08:43 +1200, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
I think you mean dlopen, dlsym and dlclose. Not full file system access
geez.
and root privs requirement. just to complement it all.
We are already getting so close to have a full blown CTFE implementation
that it isn't funny.
i'm starting to think that CTFE was a big mistake. while it's ok in
languages like Forth and Scheme, it seems to suits c-like languages bad.
people feels something wrong with it, but can't exactly see what is
wrong. and the only way to fix it is to drop it.
Nah, I like CTFE a lot.
It's just that.. ugh we can have a full implementation that isn't the
issue. It's just that we won't be committing to it. So we should
understand and not try to expand upon it.
Rather the only problem with CTFE is that it should to be within factor
of x10 slower then real-time version not x1000 times slower.
--
Dmitry Olshansky
