Should GDC remove internal dependency on stdarg?

[Johannes Pfau]

Am Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:35:52 +0100
schrieb "Iain Buclaw" <ibuclaw at ubuntu.com>:

> I'm picking up some old issues from bugzilla, this one is worth
> having a community review.
> 
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1949
> 
> 
> Should hidden GCC features be imported from a magic module
> provided by gcc.* packages - or should the implementation be
> re-written using pragmas instead?

I think I like the pragma approach more (as it allows auto-completion
in IDEs and seems less 'magic'), but I don't have a strong opinion here.

> 
> This is what LDC currently does (all of which would be possible
> to do in GDC):
> http://www.dsource.org/projects/ldc/wiki/Docs#Pragmas
> 
> 
> Discuss. :)


pragma(intrinsic) has the advantage that function declarations are
available, so tools like visualD / mono-D can provide auto-completion
for intrinsics. But maintaining all those pragma(intrinsics) is
additional work, so I don't know if it's worth it. And what happens for
intrinsics which are only supported on some architectures? version(ARM)
+ pragma(intrinsic)? I think that's too much work, especially as we
  already have working intrinsics.

pragma(no_typeinfo/no_moduleinfo) sounds useful (Manu will probably
like it ;-))

pragma(alloca): I don't know if this is needed?

pragma(allow_inline): As we don't support dmd-compatible inline
asm anymore and gcc inline asm doesn't prevent inlining AFAIR, this
pragma isn't needed with gdc?