[Issue 11881] -betterC switch suffers from bit rot

[d-bugmail at puremagic.com]

https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11881


bearophile_hugs at eml.cc changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bearophile_hugs at eml.cc


--- Comment #5 from bearophile_hugs at eml.cc 2014-01-08 03:19:48 PST ---
Where is the discussion about this feature?

The name "betterC" implies a quality judgement on C and D languages, it's
subjective. A serious technical product as D should prefer to avoid such
expressions of subjectivity, so I suggest a more descriptive and neutral name.
Something like "-noruntime" perhaps?



Currently the LDC2 compiler has a -noruntime switch:

-noruntime  - Do not allow code that generates implicit runtime calls


But currently ldc2 only gives a true/false answer, it doesn't give the line
numbers where you are the runtime is used. This makes it hard to find the
spots.

A little test program:


void main() {
    int x = 1;
    assert(x);
}


Gives:


...>ldmd2 -noruntime test.d
Error: No implicit runtime calls allowed with -noruntime option enabled

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------