Rust-based provocation :)

[Adam D. Ruppe]

On Monday, 27 May 2013 at 17:51:33 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> Looking at object.d source, it looks like you are generating 
> TypeInfo stubs that can be optimized away, have I understood it 
> right?

I'm not sure if they can be optimized away, but all I was doing 
is putting the bare minimum so the compiler would shut up.

> P.S. I can't get to run your "minimal.zip" example because of 
> "object.d(87): Error: mismatch between compiler and object.d or 
> object.di found." which does not really make sense in scope of 
> line 87. Any ideas? Have changes all relevant stuff from x32 to 
> x64 as far as I can see.


Hmm I already modified the file I have locally. I'll update the 
zip but I don't think this will work in 64 bit anyway because the 
syscall functions are all written in 32 bit inline asm. (I've 
never written a 64 bit asm program so I'm not even sure what the 
calling convention would look like there. If you ripped that out 
and used C functions instead, with an extern(C) main even maybe, 
you might be in business though.)

I think line 87 was one of the TypeInfos though, and dmd expects 
them to be a particular size, and it is slightly different on 64 
bit. If it is TypeInfo_Struct, on 32 bit void*[13] stuff; is good 
enough for dmd to shut up.

I believe on 64 bit it expects two more words, so void*[15] stuff 
should be good enough.

this should be updated and hitting "make" worked on my box, 
building 32 bit, with the test program being a bit of class 
stuff. The write() and exit() functions are moved to object.d 
right now, along with a dead stupid "allocator" that gives you a 
pointer to a static buffer (that it never frees) to play with new 
class. If you are using libc, malloc/free should be able to do 
the job instead, see the manual_alloc and manual_free stubs in 
object.d

http://arsdnet.net/dcode/minimal.zip