H1 2015 Priorities and Bare-Metal Programming

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 2/1/2015 4:05 PM, Mike wrote:
> Agreed, but in the current druntime implementation, by the time the program
> reaches main, 2 threads have already been initiated. There is also some runtime
> and code-size overhead with TLS, even if one is building a single-threaded
> executable.  I need to look into this in more detail though before I start
> spouting ideas. But I certainly welcome the dialogue.

You can use __gshared to not get TLS, and a freestanding implementation doesn't 
necessarily imply no threads.

Back in C land, I have some experience in making code that is buildable for both 
single and multi thread. The result wasn't worth it (bugs and complexity) - it 
was far better to always build for multi thread and have a runtime adapt itself 
for single thread dynamically.