On Wednesday, 20 June 2012 at 02:35:10 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/19/2012 6:06 PM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 20-06-2012 03:01, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/19/2012 3:47 PM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 19-06-2012 23:52, Walter Bright wrote:
GDC can certainly define its D calling convention to match
GCC's. It's
an "implementation defined" thing, not a language defined
one.
Then let's please rename it to the DMD ABI instead of
calling it the D
ABI
and
making it look like it's part of the language on the website.
The ABI is not part of the language. For example, the C
Standard says
nothing whatsoever about the C ABI.
Then it's very misleading that it's under the language
reference area of the
website and calls it the "D ABI" and not the "DMD ABI". This
might have been
fine back when there was only DMD, but it really needs to be
made clear that
this is not an ABI that compilers are required to follow.
You're probably right.
He's definitely right. To have the mangling rules on the same
page as the ABI and then act confused when people think it's part
of the language? I was sputtering with rage. Sputtering!
