Can GDC make DLLs?

[Ben Davis]

On 25/02/2013 00:53, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> I leave monger to Daniel, and don't really affiliate any modifications
> to gcc-proper any part if gdc.   However that's not to say that I don't
> think his work is invaluable. :)

Can't say I know what monger is, but OK :)

> I think it's horrible that you use .intel_syntax. \n shouldn't be
> required either if you just have it as one string.  ;)

Hey, I just wanted to get it working as quickly as possible - Googling 
how to use Intel syntax with GCC's inline asm was faster than trying to 
learn the absolute %hideous &satan-$born 
that(%is,$abomination,%syntax),%at&t;. ;)

About the string though, do you mean a "multiline
string like
this"? I guess I've been using Java too long, where those aren't 
allowed. Good to be reminded that's possible. :)

As it happens, I ran into some of the more general problems with GDC 
which I'm sure people are actively working on - e.g. missing stack 
traces, failure to generate catchable throwables in response to null 
pointer access violations and the like - and also, my DLL stopped 
working when I turned debug info off (I didn't investigate why beyond 
checking that the export table contained the required entries, which it 
did) - so after a whole weekend of it, I decided to cut my losses and 
shell out for the DMC source so I could fix the bug that led me to GDC 
in the first place. (I also noticed that the GDC build was over 6 MB and 
the DMD build was less than 1 MB.)

I do hope to take advantage of GCC's alleged faster code one day, but my 
current project is hardly going to tax any CPUs, so I'll go with more 
stuff working for now.

But definitely keep up the good work :)