[D-runtime] intrinsics

[Sean Kelly]

On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:09 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:

> On 6/21/2010 1:32 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> On Jun 20, 2010, at 1:47 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
>> 
>>> Philosophical question:  Should all intrinsics be exposed via druntime?
>>> 
>>> My opinion: absolutely.
>>> 
>>> The one I ran across just now:
>>> std/math.d:@safe pure nothrow long rndtol(real x);    /* intrinsic */
>> 
>> The ones in std.intrinsic (core.bitop) definitely.  For others... I dunno.  Should we really have a core.math module?
>> 
>> This reminds me that I need to submit a patch so the compiler will handle the functions in core.bitop correctly without it having to publicly import std.intrinsic.
> 
> IMHO, druntime should contain everything that the compiler expects to exist.
> All of phobos should be optional (and by that I mean std.*).  There's obviously
> slightly more in druntime than the absolute minimum the compiler expects, and
> that's ok.

(looping in Don since I'm not sure he's on the list)

Don, I vaguely recall you saying that there should be math routines in druntime.  What do you think about this?