GDC review process.

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 19-06-2012 23:52, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 6/19/2012 1:36 PM, bearophile wrote:
>>> No, but the idea was to allow D to innovate on calling
>>> conventions without disturbing code that needed to
>>> interface with C.
>>
>> The idea is nice, but ideas aren't enough. Where are the benchmarks
>> that show a
>> performance improvement over the C calling convention? And even if such
>> improvement is present, is it worth it in the face of people that
>> don't want to
>> add it to GCC?
>
> GDC can certainly define its D calling convention to match GCC's. It's
> an "implementation defined" thing, not a language defined one.
>

Then let's please rename it to the DMD ABI instead of calling it the D 
ABI and making it look like it's part of the language on the website. 
Further, D mangling rules should be separate from calling convention.

-- 
Alex Rønne Petersen
alex at lycus.org
http://lycus.org