PhobosWatch: manifest => enum

[Bruce Adams]

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:32:32 -0000, Steven Schveighoffer  
<schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Janice Caron" wrote

>> I don't see why any of this isn't possible. Maybe that's because I'm
>> dumb and I'm missing something obvious, but I'm baffled as to what it
>> is. And if I /haven't/ missed anything, then we don't need a new
>> keyword /at all/ - be it enum, manifest, or anything else.
>>
>
> I don't disagree with you :)  I'm merely clarifying Walter's gripe.
>
> I think there may be a better reason why your idea wouldn't work, but I  
> am
> not sure how the compiler is implemented, so I can't really say much.
> However, it might be a problem when you are defining constants in one  
> module
> to be used in other modules.  How does the compiler know that those
> constants won't have their address taken somewhere else?  When the  
> compiler
> creates the object file, it has to assume since the symbol is public, it  
> can
> have its address taken, no?
>
> If you had a specific D linker,  you could modify the linker to take this
> into account, but that is not the case today.
>
> -Steve
>
Another possibility is you might want a way to assert that something must  
never
use any storage. However, that seems a little bizzare.