RFC: Move runtime hook definitions to a .di file in druntime
Johannes Pfau via D.gnu
d.gnu at puremagic.com
Sat Oct 11 10:49:08 PDT 2014
Am Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:37:20 +0000
schrieb "Kevin Lamonte" <kevindotlamnodotonte at gmail.com>:
> On Saturday, 11 October 2014 at 06:59:33 UTC, Mike wrote:
> > Hello,
> > In my continued, though stalled, effort to try and make minimal
> > runtime for embedded systems, I've tried to find a way for
> > users to know at compile-time if a feature of the runtime is
> > supported or not, and more importantly, if they are explicitly
> > or implicitly using an unsupported feature.
> I have started work myself on a D kernel (using gdc based on
> 2.065 as compiler) and am going through the process of figuring
> out how the D runtime works. I have looked at XOMB and Adam
> Ruppe's minimal-d, and saw the presentation online on running D
> on ARM.
> I can boot and call D functions, but most of the D language
> remains unavailable. I am locating the various dependencies of
> object.d(i) now, and hope to be able to soon be able to at least
> complete a link with D code that has structs and enums. I am
> currently using 2.065 druntime, adding only those bits of
> object.d that the compiler is directly referencing, and
> versioning my changes with version(BareBones).
> Is your work online somewhere? Would it be OK if I took a peek?
> Mine just started (seriously, it is just hello world) over at:
> I would really like a micro-runtime that supports the D dialect
> minus GC, Threads, synchronization, OS APIs, and i386/amd64
> arch-specific things like atomic operations. So far (crossing
> fingers) it seems like such a thing is only about 5-10 kloc.
You could also have a look at
Right now it's just an experiment and I don't know if anything will be
More information about the D.gnu