On 8 April 2013 19:26, Jacob Carlborg <d...@me.com> wrote: > On 2013-04-08 10:31, Manu wrote: > > D for embedded, like PROPER embedded (microcontrollers, or even >> raspberry pi maybe?) is one area where most users would be happy to use >> a custom druntime like the ones presented earlier in this thread where >> it's strategically limited in scope and designed not to allocate. >> 'Really embedded' software tends not to care so much about portability. >> A bigger problem is D's executable size, which are rather 'plump' to be >> frank :P >> Last time I tried to understand this, one main issue was objectfactory, >> and the inability to strip out unused classinfo structures (and other >> junk). Any unused data should be stripped, but D somehow finds reason to >> keep it all. Also, template usage needs to be relaxed. Over-use of >> templates really bloats the exe. But it's not insurmountable, D could be >> used in 'proper embedded'. >> > > I agree with the templates, Phobos is full of them. Heck, I created a > D-Objective-C bridge that resulted in a 60MB GUI Hello World exeuctable. > Full of template and virtual methods bloat.
Haha, yeah I remember discussing that with you some time back when we were discussing iPhone. Rather humorous ;) I do wonder if there's room in D for built-in Obj-C compatibility; extern(ObjC) ;) OSX and iOS are not minor platforms by any measure. At least support for the most common parts of the Obj-C calling convention. D doesn't offer full C++ either, but what it does offer is very useful, and it's important that it's there.