DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Final Review

Manu turkeyman at gmail.com
Wed Dec 11 09:47:12 UTC 2019

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 7:30 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 12/10/2019 7:55 AM, IGotD- wrote:
> > This is a problem with that OS dependent libraries aren't separated from OS
> > independent libraries. In the future the atomic library should be in an OS
> > independent part of the core library while those that depends on an underlying
> > OS should be in their own. In all we need a finer granularity of the standard
> > library depending on what the library depends on. Future DIP needed for this.
> The idea of betterC is to not rely on ANY D libraries. As soon as we say "to use
> betterC you'll need to download and install these D libraries" it's dead in the
> water.
> If you use shared language operators in betterC you're just as hosed as using
> them in D. You'll need library code to do it, and you can use any C library that
> offers atomic ops to do it.

core.stdc, core.stdcpp, core.atomic should be all inline (or externs
to the C lib) and absolutely not require linking any d-libs.
Sadly, we don't have an inline qualifier that works right; the only
hack we have is to make should-be-inline functions a template with no
template args, which is a lame hack that frustrates some forms of meta

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list