BLS Wrote: > JPF wrote: > > BLS wrote: > >> c topic.. what do you think ? > >> > >> IMO : this could be a D "killer feature". > > > > I don't know how complicated that would be (licensing issues, ...), but > > as a developer / user I would really like it: It's needed to implement > > stuff like addins in a convenient way. And it would be great if we could > > finally use statically loaded shared libraries instead of static > > compilation of everything (I guess that needs compiler integration, so > > it's a good reason to include DDL with dmd ;-)). Also, if you look at > > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dll.html#Dcode the current way to do D > > DLLs for use with D code is not very developer friendly. Exporting flat > > functions like getMyClass just doesn't feel right. Now compare that with > > DDLs features: http://www.dsource.org/projects/ddl/wiki/AboutDDL .DDL > > clearly wins. By the way, I guess most of you know that already, but > > http://h3.team0xf.com/devlog/?p=12 has an updated version of DDL with a > > new linker. > > I can hear you , but it seems that we are pretty alone.
I didn't want to say much but I actually would like this a lot. I can't see how this will negatively effect anything else unlike language features so it is kind of on the level of the patch for build tools integrated in 2.031 IIRC. I guess if someone other than Walter could do the development then he probably wouldn't mind applying the patches.