Object file questions

[Artur Skawina via D.gnu]

On 08/16/14 12:41, Mike via D.gnu wrote:
> On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 09:59:03 UTC, Artur Skawina via D.gnu wrote:
>>
>> Taking the address of an always_inline function is allowed.
>>
> 
> It may be allowed, but it probably shouldn't be.  Always-inlining a function and taking the address of that function is contradictory.

Address-of should work -- disallowing it wouldn't help much, but would
create problems for code that needs to call the function both directly
and indirectly. This is actually a larger problem for D than for C (where
it's allowed) because of generic code, templates and delegates. The
alternative would be requiring trivial not- at inline wrappers and compile
failures if one is accidentally forgotten.

A `@nocode` attribute would be a good idea, yes, but there's no need
to make it implicit for `@inline`.

> But this situation demonstrates why having an intelligent linker is a better solution than decorating with attributes.  The linker should know if you took an address of an always-inlined function or not and decide whether or not to remove it from the binary.

It already does. Apparently there are some kind of problems with
certain setups, but, instead of addressing those problems, more and
more /language/ hacks are proposed...

artur