@ctfeonly

Manu turkeyman at gmail.com
Fri Dec 8 18:59:00 UTC 2017


On 7 December 2017 at 19:43, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> On 12/7/2017 5:20 PM, Manu wrote:
>
>> Right, but that's what I'm saying; using your solution of putting a
>> function in a module that's not compiled to inhibit code generation won't
>> inhibit people from *attempting* to making runtime calls (and getting link
>> errors)... whereas a compile error trying to runtime-call a function that
>> shouldn't be runtime-called might be more desirable.
>>
>
> That's exactly what happens if you put a declaration in a .h file, call
> the function, and don't link in the implementation. I don't see the
> difference.
>

Nicholas wants a *compile* error, not a link error.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20171208/4a85e93e/attachment.html>


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list