On 13 February 2012 17:55, Johannes Pfau <nos...@example.com> wrote: > 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.
I think --disable-libphobos would go hand in hand with some sort of --default-gdc-lib=FOO. FOO being the default library the driver attempts to link to. This would be for people who have their own substitute for libphobos, be it a mini druntime, tango, or other bespoke library. However the constant should always be that object.di is always shipped, and the compiler *always* depends on that. Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
