DMD 2.055 Crashing on Windows 7 x64 (So is my D program)

[Mehrdad]

On 9/26/2011 2:53 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> I think the reason Walter always gives is that dmd would then have to 
> output COFF objects, whereas it currently outputs OMF.  OPTLINK also 
> does not accept COFF objects.
Wait, why does it have to output COFF? Can't you just use an OMF version 
of msvcrt.lib, like we're doing for all the other Windows libraries?
I'm confused as to how this is an issue.

> I think a lot of people would very much welcome this change, but it's 
> somewhat of an underwhelming change.  Instead of using DMC's runtime 
> for C functions, you are using VC++'s runtime.  But who cares?  I want 
> D's runtime to be better :)
Well, sort of. It's not so much Visual C++'s runtime, but it's 
Microsoft's C runtime that's packaged with Windows (which Microsoft 
ironically doesn't want you to use, but which compilers like GCC use 
anyway... and it turns out better than anything bundled with Visual 
Studio). You don't actually need Visual Studio to use it (in fact, it's 
not even included) -- the Windows Driver Kit has the bundled stuff required.

In all honesty I don't see a single thing about it that I would call 
"better". Do you have any examples of things that snn.lib does 'better' 
than msvcrt.lib?

The only incompatibility (which isn't "better" or "worse"... it's just 
an incompatibility) I can see is exception handling, but that's 
obviously an exception that can be left in snn.lib. Almost all the rest 
of the runtime, though, can be easily removed and redirected to 
msvcrt.dll... and I don't think there'd be any problems. (Are there?)

> I think the best path is weaning ourselves off of C dependencies.  
> Starting with FILE *, which has a lot of limitations.  It's part of 
> the reason I'm working on reworking std.stdio.
> For example, with my version of std.stdio, you would never have this 
> problem, because it deals with the HANDLE directly instead of through 
> DMC's file descriptor layer.
100% agree, but we weren't talking about D in the first place. :) This 
is all regarding what's /already/ taking place in snn.lib /before/ D 
runs, which is obviously unrelated to what's going on in std.stdio.

I'm really curious to know what specific problems are keeping us from 
doing the switch (i.e. what snn.lib does better than msvcrt.dll). :)