[D-runtime] Is core.math public API?

Alex Rønne Petersen xtzgzorex at gmail.com
Tue Oct 2 16:51:36 PDT 2012

On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM, David Nadlinger <code at klickverbot.at> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Alex Rønne Petersen <xtzgzorex at gmail.com> wrote:
>> It isn't.
>> See: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.d.runtime/1187/match=core+math
> In my opinion, saying that something isn't part of the public druntime
> API, but at the same time is intended to be used from Phobos doesn't
> make much sense. After all, the whole point behind druntime (well, one
> of them) was to introduce a low-level abstraction layer so that Phobos
> could just be a library like any other. If Phobos ends up calling
> undocumented, private functions, "like any other" is definitely not
> true. Why would Phobos be allowed to call core.math functions, but not
> Tango or any other library?
> Anyway, currently std.math does not use core.math, but declares a few
> magic functions which are name-matched by DMD (the only remaining ones
> in std.*, by the way). This forces us to edit that file in the LDC
> copy of Phobos, because our intrinsics system works differently.
> So, would anyone object if I modify std.math to forward the functions
> to core.math instead, and add the latter to the public docs? Judging
> from Don's message linked by Alex, this was the original intention
> behind core.math anyway, and would remove one compiler dependency from
> Phobos, which is imho a desirable goal. Of course, I'd also extend the
> core.math docs with a short note mentioning that it only provides
> low-level intrinsics and std.math is to be preferred for actual
> application use.

I think this is perfectly reasonable - we need to eliminate any and
all magic support the compiler has for things in Phobos. It must be
another library or we have serious language design issues.


More information about the D-runtime mailing list