D as A Better C?

[Paulo Pinto]

Am 13.02.2014 19:06, schrieb inout:
> On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 19:43:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> I've toyed with this idea for a while, and wondered what the interest
>> there is in something like this.
>>
>> The idea is to be able to use a subset of D that does not require any
>> of druntime or phobos - it can be linked merely with the C standard
>> library. To that end, there'd be a compiler switch (-betterC) which
>> would enforce the subset.
>>
>> (First off, I hate the name "better C", any suggestions?)
>>
>> The subset would disallow use of any features that rely on:
>>
>> 1. moduleinfo
>> 2. exception handling
>> 3. gc
>> 4. Object
>>
>> I've used such a subset before when bringing D up on a new platform,
>> as the new platform didn't have a working phobos.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> -no-moduleinfo
> -no-exceptions
> -no-gc
> -no-object
>
> There is absolutely NO need to give any name to that beast.
> Otherwise, it's an excellent idea!
> You could still use classes e.g. with C++ linkage.

Can we also get a build tool that produces all combinations for 
libraries distributed in binary form?

--
Paulo