Battle-plan for CTFE

[Rory McGuire via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 9:09 PM, David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d-announce <
digitalmars-d-announce at puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, 1 September 2016 at 16:43:53 UTC, Rory McGuire wrote:
>
>> is that in one of the "semantic" passes the compiler has?
>>
>
> For reference, I've laid out the reasons why this proposal couldn't work
> to Stefan here: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/p
> ull/6098#issuecomment-243375543
>
> The real reason is not so much in the pass structure of the compiler as in
> the fact that CTFE by definition executes the same function body that is
> also emitted to the runtime binary.
>
>  — David
>

okay thanks, I'll take a look at the link.

Question: if the function runs the same, why can't I catch the exception?
>From what Stefan said even if I could catch the exception static if still
wouldn't compile different code.

bool _checkCTFE() {
try {
import std.uuid;
enum id = new UUID("8AB3060E-2cba-4f23-b74c-b52db3bdfb46");
return false;
} catch (Throwable t) {
return true;
}
}

The above still fails during CTFE, compiler just exists with:
enforceCTFE.d(20): Error: variable enforceCTFE._checkCTFE.id : Unable to
initialize enum with class or pointer to struct. Use static const variable
instead.


So why can't we even catch the Error during CTFE, that would at least help
somewhat.

At the moment I just have a verbose logging mode with pragma(msg) for my
CTFE stuff.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d-announce/attachments/20160901/f8c56eb6/attachment.html>