Request for Comment assert(__ctfe)
atila.neves at gmail.com
Wed Apr 8 09:53:24 UTC 2020
On Tuesday, 7 April 2020 at 21:11:11 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
> On 4/7/20 5:17 AM, Atila Neves wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 7 April 2020 at 06:55:59 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> Sounds ok to me, as long as the assert(__ctfe) is the first
>>> statement in the function body.
>>> Though I would check the linker map file to see if the linker
>>> didn't already omit functions that were never called.
>> I think the problem with relying on the linker is that the
>> user still pays with longer compile times for codegen that
>> isn't needed.
> Isn't there an issue for better C as well? If a function can't
> be compiled in betterC but is valid for CTFE, then this could
> be a potential solution.
> I don't know how this works today.
Good question, me neither.
More information about the Digitalmars-d