A betterC modular standard library?

[Ilya Yaroshenko via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 09:12:55 UTC, Timothee Cour wrote:
> @ilya: regarding -betterC 's stated goal to bypass druntime:
>
> besides static linking (which can be inefficient), why not use 
> runtime
> shared libraries to distribute mir (eg GLAS) to C clients ?
>
> IIRC, from a single C++ program, I am able to dlopen & dlsym & 
> run D functions defined in shared libraries built with 
> different compilers (eg dmd and ldc) even if they use GC (and 
> therefore dmd's and ldc's druntime) ; pseudocode:
>
> // main.cpp
> ```
> void main(){
>   dlopen, dlsym, and run "void fun1()" from libfun_dmd.so
>   dlopen, dlsym, and run "void fun2()" from libfun_ldc.so
> }
> ```
>
> That would provide the needed isolation without suffering from 
> disadvantages of static libraries (eg bloat); compared to the 
> betterC alternative, you'd have access to all of 
> druntime/phobos and not have to reinvent the wheel

Because I do not have control on phobos, i can not distribute my 
copy of phobos with required patches like normal cache size 
estimation (core.cpuid is broken). Why not to fix core.cpuid?  
Its source code is not manageable comparing with mir-cpuid: it is 
faster to write a module from scratch for this case. DUB package 
appears when I want it, LDC release may appear after 6-10 months 
(depends on distribution).