Max Samukha wrote:
Tom S wrote:
And/or compile some modules without -g. Maybe you don't need debug
symbols everywhere.
And please vote for
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/votes.cgi?action=show_bug&bug_id=424.
Something makes Walter think this bug is not critical.
I think he knows... But it
Tom S wrote:
Max Samukha wrote:
Tom S wrote:
And/or compile some modules without -g. Maybe you don't need debug
symbols everywhere.
And please vote for
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/votes.cgi?action=show_bug&bug_id=424.
Something makes Walter think this bug is not critical.
I think he k
Tom S wrote:
> Max Samukha wrote:
>> Tom S wrote:
>>> And/or compile some modules without -g. Maybe you don't need debug
>>> symbols everywhere.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> And please vote for
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/votes.cgi?action=show_bug&bug_id=424.
>> Something makes Walter think this bug is not
bearophile wrote:
> A question about D1 specs (that may be useful for LDC).
>
> In the following code there's anarray of structs S. Is it OK, according to
> D1 specs, to not initialize the memory of this array if the compiler sees
> that all fields of S have a void init?
>
> struct S { double x
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 07:06:25 -0400, Max Samukha
wrote:
bearophile wrote:
A question about D1 specs (that may be useful for LDC).
In the following code there's anarray of structs S. Is it OK, according
to
D1 specs, to not initialize the memory of this array if the compiler
sees
that al
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> That's an interesting question. The compiler does set void-initialized
>> member variables to zeros:
>>
>> struct S { double x = void, y = void; }
>> void main() {
>> S s; // x and y are initialized to 0
>> }
>>
>> I think this is a bug. Such members should be le
Don wrote:
>
> Agreed. (But it's just a performance issue, it's not incorrect to
> initialize them to zero).
And void initializers are all about performance :) Otherwise, they are
useless.
Max Samukha wrote:
Tom S wrote:
Max Samukha wrote:
COFF/ELF output would not be that bad though, at least if there's some
linker that supports these *and* its license allows it to be bundled
with DMD.
I doubt such a linker exists. And if it does, I doubt it is of quality good
enough to replac
Max Samukha:
> IMO, the initialization code shouldn't be generated for aggregates that have
> all members void-initialized, and consequently for arrays of such
> aggregates.
Thanks to all people that have given me answers and opinions.
I have discussed this topic a bit with Tomas Lindquist Olsen
Umm.. A shot in the dark?
void main(){
struct SomeStruct{
int* p;
void aa(int a){
*p = a;
}
}
class SomeClass{
int a;
SomeStruct foo(){
SomeStruct m;
m.g = &a;
return m;
}
}
SomeClass inst = new SomeClass;
ins
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
> Max Samukha wrote:
>> Tom S wrote:
>>> Max Samukha wrote:
>>> COFF/ELF output would not be that bad though, at least if there's some
>>> linker that supports these *and* its license allows it to be bundled
>>> with DMD.
>>
>>
11 matches
Mail list logo
