Am Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:36:22 +0100 schrieb Johannes Pfau <nos...@example.com>:
> Yep, anything 'class' related won't work without object.di and > probably much more. But to make a app using those features link, > object_.d needs to be compiled in as well, and that pulls in some > druntime dependencies (not too many), so to ship a minimal working > object.di we'd also have to ship a minimal 'runtime' library. I'm not > sure what's the right decision here, but it'd be great if could make > a minimal compiler work for C-like code with minimal dependencies > (one object.di file shipped by default definitely counts as minimal > dependencies though). I guess we should just keep everything as it is. A minimal runtime seems too much effort right now and for testing very basic functionality it's always possible to create an empty object.di.
