On 11/8/11 10:44 AM, deadalnix wrote:
Le 08/11/2011 14:31, Gor Gyolchanyan a écrit :
Well except that module can modify a and not be in the tree.
A single compilation includes only two parts: compiling D source code
and linking in object files or static libraries. object files and
static libraries are by no means involved in compile-time activity,
which leaves us with with compiling D source code. A single
compilation of D source code can be viewed as a list of import trees,
originating from the enlisted modules to be compiled. After
eliminating duplicates we have a list of small trees, which can be
rooted together to form a single tree, which in turn can be processed
as described above. Optionally, in order to allow separate
compilations, a cache can be maintained to hold the results of
previous compile-time computations to be used in the next ones inside
a "project" (to be defined).
module a;
int a = 0;
-------------------
module b;
import a;
int somefunction() {
return ++a;
}
static assert(somefunction() = 1);
-------------------
module c;
import a;
int somefunction() {
return ++a;
}
static assert(somefunction() = 1);
There answer here is: who cares?
Is your point to prove that you can make some code that is useless? Why
not make something useful with CTFE?
It's sad to see people come here proposing great ideas (I think CTFE
beyond what D is capable is great, and I'm implementing that in my own
language) and other people come with nonsense useless examples to ask
"What happens here?"
Use the tool to make magic, not to show how you can get undefined
behaviour...
