[D-runtime] [dmd-internals] why core/thread.d and core/thread.di in druntime?

[Don Clugston]

On 3 January 2013 22:57, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 03, 2013 16:23:42 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Sigh, that kind of duplication is a bummer. Any bright ideas on how to
>> avoid it? Can we try again using the automatic di generator?
>
> Unless something major has changed, the automatic di generator is pretty
> pointless. It strips almost nothing. There was a pull request which changed
> that, but I don't remember what happened with that. I don't remember it being
> merged (though it might have been). However, in preparation for that, I
> believe that the makefile was changed to just copy and rename the files instead
> of using the generator (since we really don't want all of those files stripped
> normally since it kills CTFE). Either way, we don't want thread.di being
> treated like all of the other .di files in druntime.
>
> I remember getting the impression that thread.di required better control over
> what was and wasn't in there than the generator was likely to provide even
> with stripping stuff, but I'd have to go dig through archives for discussions
> on that. So, if the generator was updated to actually strip most stuff, then it
> might work, or it might not.
>
> Martin is likely to know more, since he's the one who made the change in the
> first place.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Personally I don't think we should have any .di files in there,
whatsoever. They just cause problems, for NO BENEFIT. We don't want
have trade secrets we want to hide, and .di files serve no other
purpose.
(Please everyone, abandon any fanciful ideas that they speed
compilation. Anybody who thinks it does, clearly hasn't done any
profiling).