"Better C" runtime?

[Kagamin via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 26 July 2014 at 14:50:43 UTC, Mike wrote:
> I'm thinking of actually creating a couple of different 
> runtimes.
>  The one I'm researching right now is intended to be very 
> C-like, i.e. no classes, exceptions, garbage collector, runtime 
> type info, threads, TLS, etc... Just the most basic parts of D 
> that one would need to build a single-threaded kernel. Dynamic 
> memory allocation may not even be needed.
>
> Such a runtime would certainly be better than C because there 
> would still be CTFE, mixins, templates, etc...  Very cool!  So 
> far, my experiments seem to indicate that such a runtime would 
> require very little code; potentially less than a few thousand 
> lines (famous last words).

I find that TypeInfo is just not worth it. You get too much 
without it already and resulting runtime is very small.