CTFE and DI: The Crossroads of D

[Adam Wilson]

On Wed, 09 May 2012 13:51:22 -0700, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com>  
wrote:

> On Wednesday, May 09, 2012 22:46:58 foobar wrote:
>> This makes sense.
>> So this means the datetime example would fail to compile when
>> using druntime's .di files. This should be emphasized in the
>> spec/docs to minimize the chance for gotchas for users.
>>
>> We could add an exception to this rule by tagging functions with
>> e.g. "export". What do you think?
>
> export already has another meaning. It also goes against the whole idea  
> that
> any function is supposed to be CTFEable without special annotations.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

I think an attribute like @implementation would be useful here. It could  
easily be used by the DI generator to keep the implementation in the DI  
file. You would only need to apply it to functions that you want to be  
CTFEable externally, internal CTFE would still work the same.

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/