On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 20:33:26 UTC, 0xEAB wrote:
Are unittests that are marked @safe actually checked for safety?
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/blob/v2.093.1/std/file.d#L4937
How comes this unittest is @safe when `dirEntries` appears to
be @system?
I see what happened now: those
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 20:55:54 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
I guess this was written before betterC existed.
Well, -betterC existed even then, but it was *completely*
useless. It didn't become useful until 2016 or 2017.
But around that same time, going minimal runtime got even easier,
so I
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 19:12:59 UTC, aberba wrote:
How about an alternative runtime + standard library for
embedded systems...with a least bare minimum. I've seen a
number of efforts to get D to run in those environments but
almost none of them is packaged for others to consume.
Are unittests that are marked @safe actually checked for safety?
https://github.com/dlang/phobos/blob/v2.093.1/std/file.d#L4937
How comes this unittest is @safe when `dirEntries` appears to be
@system?
Example I:
https://run.dlang.io/is/Vf0STw
Error: @safe function onlineapp.listdir
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 16:18:00 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 15:23:28 UTC, Severin Teona
wrote:
[...]
Use betterC, which is much better suited for microcontrollers
than the full D. The disadvantage is that many great features
are disabled in betterC.
[...]
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 15:23:28 UTC, Severin Teona wrote:
CMake Error at
/snap/cmake/549/share/cmake-3.18/Modules/CMakeTestCCompiler.cmake:66 (message):
This is apparently a non-LDC specific issue, a default CMake C
compiler sanity check fails. When looking at that file, you'll
see
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 15:23:28 UTC, Severin Teona wrote:
I would also appreciate any advice regarding ways to build or
create a small runtime for microcontrollers (runtime that can
fit in the memory of a microcontroller).
Thank you very much,
Teona
[1]:
Hello,
I have been trying to build the LDC runtime for a Nucleo-f429zi
board with a Cortex-M4 CPU, by following [1]. The target is not
dependent on
any operating system (as the target board uses a STM32
microcontroller), so the gcc toolchain I have used is
arm-none-eabi-gcc(9.3.1).
The error
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 11:44:40 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 11:25:15 UTC, wjoe wrote:
It's easy to declare the entire module @safe and functions
which can't be can be declared @system.
However there is const, immutable, pure, @nogc and nothrow but
no mutable,
On Monday, 7 September 2020 at 11:25:15 UTC, wjoe wrote:
It's easy to declare the entire module @safe and functions
which can't be can be declared @system.
However there is const, immutable, pure, @nogc and nothrow but
no mutable, impure, @gc and throws.
Why is that ?
Mostly because
It's easy to declare the entire module @safe and functions which
can't be can be declared @system.
However there is const, immutable, pure, @nogc and nothrow but no
mutable, impure, @gc and throws.
Why is that ?
11 matches
Mail list logo