On 11-04-2012 01:29, H. S. Teoh wrote:
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
Excellent. I'll get to it then. :)
--
- Alex
