Disable GC entirely

[Regan Heath]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 12:30:56 +0100, Manu <turkeyman at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10 April 2013 21:09, Regan Heath <regan at netmail.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:59:32 +0100, Dicebot <m.strashun at gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>  On Wednesday, 10 April 2013 at 10:53:26 UTC, Regan Heath wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hmm..
>>>>
>>>>  A is not final.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> True.  But, I don't see how this matters.
>>>>
>>>>  A has no internal linkage. It can be inherited from in other
>>>>> compilation unit.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> False.  In this first example we are compiling A and B together (into  
>>>> an
>>>> exe - I left that off) so the compiler has all sources and all uses  
>>>> of all
>>>> methods of A (and B).
>>>>
>>>>  notVirt is virtual.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It may actually be (I don't know) but it certainly does not have to be
>>>> (compiler has all sources/uses) and my impression was that it  
>>>> /should/ not
>>>> be.
>>>>
>>>> R
>>>>
>>>
>>> If it is compiled all at once and compiled into executable binary than
>>> yes, you examples are valid and compiler _MAY_ omit virtual.
>>>
>>
>> Exactly the point I was trying to make.  I wanted to establish the point
>> at which the design problems (what D defines/intends to do) arise, vs  
>> when
>> the implementation problems arise (DMD not doing what D intends).
>>
>>
>>  But
>>> a) DMD doesn't do it as far as I am aware.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe, maybe not.  I have no idea.  My understanding of the design
>> decision is that DMD will eventually do it.
>
>
> I feel like I'm being ignored. It's NOT POSSIBLE.

You're not.  The issue here is my understanding of the problem (and  
compilation etc in general) and why you believe it's an insurmountable  
problem.  I am trying to both understand the issue and explore possible  
solutions.

R

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/