On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 01:09:48AM +0200, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote: > On 11-04-2012 01:09, H. S. Teoh wrote: > >On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:10:19AM +0200, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote: > >>I'm planning to go over druntime and add nothrow/pure everywhere I > >>can, but I don't want to disturb anyone else who's currently working > >>on patches that this could disrupt. > >[...] > > > >Please do. The current lack of proper function qualifiers has been > >bugging me to no end, every time I try to do the same in my own code. I > >inevitably have to remove some qualifiers that should be there, just > >because of a single druntime construct that wasn't properly qualified. > > > >And while you're at it, you might want to consider const too. Last I > >looked, a whole bunch of stuff that should be const, isn't. > > > >And best of luck to you... the last time I tried to do the same thing I > >ended up changing almost the entire druntime, and still couldn't get the > >result to compile. > > > > > >T > > > > Yeah, I've made several attempts in the past without much luck... > Hopefully I'll get there at some point. > > So, I won't disrupt your AA hacking by doing this? [...]
No, I'm doing the new AA as a completely separate struct for now. I won't be touching druntime until the AA code itself is more-or-less completed. Once that's done, it should be just a matter of copy-n-pasting into object_.d with some minor changes (plus what's anticipated to be very painful dmd changes, from what people have been telling me :-P). In fact, if druntime stuff is properly marked, I'll be able to uncomment a few more qualifiers in the AA code that currently can't work 'cos of druntime's brokenness. T -- Long, long ago, the ancient Chinese invented a device that lets them see through walls. It was called the "window".