GDC review process.

[Iain Buclaw]

On 20 June 2012 21:16, Alex Rønne Petersen <alex at lycus.org> wrote:
> On 20-06-2012 21:48, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
>>
>> On 20/06/12 20:35, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>>>
>>> And x86 inline assembler... on ARM? I don't think I follow.
>>
>>
>> If I understand http://dlang.org/iasm.html correctly, the idea is that D
>> should have an inline assembler for each target architecture.
>>
>> AFAICS what's desired is that you should be able to insert
>>
>> asm
>> {
>> // target-specific assembly goes here
>> }
>>
>> .... and have it accepted by _any_ D compiler. That seems to me to be an
>>
>> important part of the language in general and even more so on
>> architectures that are suited to embedded systems. So while it may make
>> sense to cut the inline assembly in the short term for GDC, it doesn't
>> make sense to me for it to be a change that lasts.
>
>
> GDC currently supports x86, ARM, PowerPC, MIPS, SPARC, and possibly others.
> The language reference lists assembly syntax for x86. I understand that in
> an ideal world, we'd have standardized assembly syntaxes for all of these
> architectures, but somebody has to actually spec and implement them.
>
> Besides, Iain has already pointed out that the x86 syntax in the spec
> doesn't integrate with GCC's inline assembly support at all (which is why
> GDC had the glue code for it). It took around 2000 lines (if memory serves)
> to translate the D inline assembly to GCC inline assembly. Now imagine
> having to do this for every architecture ever supported.
>

More closer to 4000 lines, and the current implementation is in no
state to be able to add more architechtures into the mix.


-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';