FYI - mo' work on std.allocator

Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Tue May 6 11:55:37 PDT 2014


06-May-2014 10:20, Marco Leise пишет:
> Am Mon, 05 May 2014 21:13:10 +0400
> schrieb Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh at gmail.com>:
>
>> 05-May-2014 20:57, Marco Leise пишет:
>>>
>>> That sounds like a more complicated topic than anything I had
>>> in mind. I think a »std.virtualmemory« module should already
>>> implement all the primitives in a portable form, so we don't
>>> have to do that again for the next use case. Since
>>> cross-platform code is always hard to get right, it could also
>>> avoid latent bugs.
>>
>> I had an idea of core.vmm. It didn't survive the last review though,
>> plus I never got around to test OSes aside from Windows & Linux.
>> Comments on initial design are welcome.
>> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/653
>
> That's exactly what I had in mind and more. :)

Cool.
I was ambitious at start until I released that there were about 5-6 
logically consistent primitives of which many OS-es provided say 3 or 4 
with little or inexact overlap. That's why I thought of focusing on 
common recipes, and provide building blocks for them.

> These are all free functions that can be used as building
> blocks for more specific objects. Was there a dedicated review
> thread on the news group? All I could find was a discussion
> about why not to use a VMM struct with static functions as
> a namespace replacement.

I don't recall such but I think I did a tiny topic on it in general D NG.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list