D Language Foundation January 2023 Quarterly Meeting Summary

[Hipreme]

On Wednesday, 1 March 2023 at 13:01:03 UTC, Guillaume Piolat 
wrote:
> On Monday, 27 February 2023 at 14:27:25 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
>>
>> Is there a replacement? If not, why is this even being 
>> discussed? I'm all for breaking changes if there's a benefit 
>> and an easy path to maintain the existing functionality. This 
>> fails on both counts. If you want to enforce that it's not 
>> used, add a flag, but don't take it away just for the sake of 
>> taking it away.
>
> What would be really cool and end-game would be if the gap 
> between druntime and custom runtime such as HipremeEngine would 
> be smoothed out and only one druntime needs to exist. I think 
> this has been the direction for years: ProtoObject, 
> Object.factory, etc.

In the experience I got from dealing with the D runtime, this is 
what I feel like it needs:

Compiler could support a flag which is basically saying: User 
must provide hook functions such as malloc/free, exit(or assert) 
(those are the most  basic ones), for the runtime to work.

So, instead of being dropped on a static assertion with plenty of 
types not found, you get into a runtime error from the features 
actually being used. That way, no one will ever need to create a 
custom runtime that does nothing only for the sake of it being 
compiled.


This is all possible to implement too by using weak compiler 
attribute. The custom runtime I done is roughly 99% of what the 
current runtime is, the only difference being those allocators 
and not supporting throw because I don't know how to implement 
stack rewinding.

While that is not done I'll keep maintaining my own for accessing 
those unimplemented systems.