Re: core.cpuid

2011-11-04 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On Friday, November 04, 2011 10:39 Dejan Lekic wrote: > Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > And why not? Thread is in core. So are other modules that it's perfectly > > - Mostly because You may end-up writing non-portable code unless you are > realy careful (and you must be if you use core modules! ;). It

Re: core.cpuid

2011-11-04 Thread Don
On 04.11.2011 18:27, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Friday, November 04, 2011 08:11 Dejan Lekic wrote: Manu wrote: Seems like a horrible assumption to make when inventing a systems programming language that intends to go head to head with C/C++ :) FYI, C/C++ also have cpuid, and it is also pretty

Re: core.cpuid

2011-11-04 Thread Dejan Lekic
Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > And why not? Thread is in core. So are other modules that it's perfectly - Mostly because You may end-up writing non-portable code unless you are realy careful (and you must be if you use core modules! ;). It is similar to the asm{} block - you should not use it at

Re: core.cpuid

2011-11-04 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On Friday, November 04, 2011 08:11 Dejan Lekic wrote: > Manu wrote: > > Seems like a horrible assumption to make when inventing a systems > > programming language that intends to go head to head with C/C++ :) > > FYI, C/C++ also have cpuid, and it is also pretty low-level like in D (ie. > develope

Re: core.cpuid

2011-11-04 Thread Dejan Lekic
Manu wrote: > Seems like a horrible assumption to make when inventing a systems > programming language that intends to go head to head with C/C++ :) > FYI, C/C++ also have cpuid, and it is also pretty low-level like in D (ie. developers rarely use cpuid.h directly). You should not (in practice)

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-31 Thread Don
which are Itanium-specific). On 31 October 2011 09:11, Don mailto:nos...@nospam.com>> wrote: On 30.10.2011 02:49, Manu wrote: What's the deal with core.cpuid? I realise it is an x86 opcode, but is that something that you really want totally bare in core l

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-31 Thread Sean Kelly
> On 31 October 2011 09:11, Don wrote: > On 30.10.2011 02:49, Manu wrote: > What's the deal with core.cpuid? > I realise it is an x86 opcode, but is that something that you really > want totally bare in core like that? > I'm experimenting with other architectures, and

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-31 Thread Manu
; module? I'd like a low level query like that for all processors. It just seems weird having an x86-only feature exposed directly in core. On 31 October 2011 09:11, Don wrote: > On 30.10.2011 02:49, Manu wrote: > >> What's the deal with core.cpuid? >> I realise it

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-31 Thread Don
On 30.10.2011 02:49, Manu wrote: What's the deal with core.cpuid? I realise it is an x86 opcode, but is that something that you really want totally bare in core like that? I'm experimenting with other architectures, and some sort of core.processorInfo would be really nice, surely an AP

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-30 Thread Chante
ic.com... >> >> > What's the deal with core.cpuid? >> >> I think they just want the "mainstream" >> ("sheeple"/"followers"/"believers"/"90210_ers"/"younsters", >> etc.). If you >>

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-30 Thread Alex Rønne Petersen
On 30-10-2011 06:05, Andrew Wiley wrote: On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Chante wrote: "Manu" mailto:turkey...@gmail.com>> wrote in message news:mailman.586.1319935753.24802.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > What's the deal with core.cpuid? I

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-30 Thread Chante
"Andrew Wiley" wrote in message news:mailman.591.1319951129.24802.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Chante > wrote: > >> >> "Manu" wrote in message >> news:mailman.586.1319935753.24802.digitalmar...@puremagic

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-29 Thread Andrew Wiley
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Chante wrote: > > "Manu" wrote in message > news:mailman.586.1319935753.24802.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > > > What's the deal with core.cpuid? > > I think they just want the "mainstream" > ("shee

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-29 Thread Chante
"Manu" wrote in message news:mailman.586.1319935753.24802.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > What's the deal with core.cpuid? I think they just want the "mainstream" ("sheeple"/"followers"/"believers"/"90210_ers"/"younste

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-29 Thread Manu
Seems like a horrible assumption to make when inventing a systems programming language that intends to go head to head with C/C++ :) On 30 October 2011 03:51, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote: > On 30-10-2011 02:49, Manu wrote: > >> What's the deal with core.cpuid? >> I real

Re: core.cpuid

2011-10-29 Thread Alex Rønne Petersen
On 30-10-2011 02:49, Manu wrote: What's the deal with core.cpuid? I realise it is an x86 opcode, but is that something that you really want totally bare in core like that? I'm experimenting with other architectures, and some sort of core.processorInfo would be really nice, surely an AP

core.cpuid

2011-10-29 Thread Manu
What's the deal with core.cpuid? I realise it is an x86 opcode, but is that something that you really want totally bare in core like that? I'm experimenting with other architectures, and some sort of core.processorInfo would be really nice, surely an API for this stuff should be more generalised...?