Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:39:13 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
> Optlink is written entirely in rather impenetrable assembler code, and
> is resistant to understanding and modification. Hence, over the last few
> months I've been very slowly converting it to C, function by function.
>
> [...]
>
> Once
Sergey Gromov wrote:
Actually, I'm slowly working on a D linker myself. Writing it in D,
from scratch. My goal is to allow linking a mix of OMF and COFF objects
and libraries into the same executable, obviating the need for any
conversion. I wonder if it's feasible to continue my work. I'm ju
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:02:59 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
> Sergey Gromov wrote:
>> Actually, I'm slowly working on a D linker myself. Writing it in D,
>> from scratch. My goal is to allow linking a mix of OMF and COFF objects
>> and libraries into the same executable, obviating the need for any
>>
Sergey Gromov wrote:
Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:39:13 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
Optlink is written entirely in rather impenetrable assembler code, and
is resistant to understanding and modification. Hence, over the last few
months I've been very slowly converting it to C, function by function.
[.
Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:10:36 +0100, Don wrote:
> Sergey Gromov wrote:
>> Actually, I'm slowly working on a D linker myself.
>
> I hope you're making use of pragma's DDL code. He did so much work in
> making sense of the object file formats.
Good thing you told me. I'll definitely try to reuse as
I made up an implementation of SHA-1 and SHA-256 today, based on the
algorithm in the Wikipedia article. It passes a small unittest,
comparing its output to the linux sha utilities for the same input. I
don't know how good the speed is, but I tried to avoid unnecessary
copying, and speed can always
