Le 09/05/2012 22:40, Adam Wilson a écrit :
On Wed, 09 May 2012 13:14:32 -0700, Steven Schveighoffer
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2012 15:57:46 -0400, Adam D. Ruppe
<[email protected]> wrote:
The real WTF is we use .di files for druntime in the
first place. It is performance sensitive and open source.
We should be using the actual sources for inlining, ctfe,
etc. anyway.
Let's not torpedo the .di patch's value for just phobos.
I agree (although not generating .di files does not fix all the
problems of inlining and ctfe -- there are many stubbed functions even
in the .d files).
In my opinion, .di generation should by default generate
fully-stripped code except for templates. If you want functions to be
CTFE-able, don't use auto-generated .di files to import them.
-Steve
That is what my patch does, unfortunately, Phobos won't compile with the
patch applied because of the CTFE reliance on the DRT source.
It doesn't make much sens to di phobos and druntime IMO.
