For the next release, which we should be doing pretty soon, I think, I'd rather not do either. For the next release, if it's reasonable to truely finish the conversion w/in one release cycle, I'd prefer to finish it.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2012, Daniel Murphy wrote: > Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 03:23:36 +1100 > From: Daniel Murphy <[email protected]> > Reply-To: Discuss the internals of DMD <[email protected]> > To: Discuss the internals of DMD <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [dmd-internals] AssociativeArray in druntime should go before the > next release > > The former now, then the latter after the release. > > It's not just a matter of moving the code into object.d (object.di > actually, we need a way too fix the duplication as well) For the > transition to really work, the way AAs are handled in the frontend > needs to be redone so that the glue layer, the backend, and the > interpreter can completely forget they exist. > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 3:16 AM, Brad Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > Meaning return to before there was an AA type in object.d or complete the > > transition to just the object.d version (which > > would include moving the code hidden off in the runtime into either > > object.d or a file imported publically by object.d)? > > > > I'd prefer the latter. > > > _______________________________________________ > dmd-internals mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals > _______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
