On 3 September 2012 18:15, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 9/3/12, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> Indeed, C++ classes are always passed in memory by design. Whereas
> pointers could be passed in registers.
>
> That's cool. I learn something new every day. :)
>
>> And this is one
>> reason why you need to en
On 9/3/12, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Indeed, C++ classes are always passed in memory by design. Whereas
pointers could be passed in registers.
That's cool. I learn something new every day. :)
> And this is one
> reason why you need to ensure that function signatures match in both D
> and C/C++ code
On 3 September 2012 16:52, Daniel Green wrote:
> My best guess, is the issue is related to the struct being 4 bytes.
> A similar segfault occurs if you attempt to access in a similar manner using
> c++.
>
> A 4 byte struct will fit into a single register making pointers
> unnecessary/slower and it
My best guess, is the issue is related to the struct being 4 bytes.
A similar segfault occurs if you attempt to access in a similar manner
using c++.
A 4 byte struct will fit into a single register making pointers
unnecessary/slower and it's likely some part of the ABI has taken this
into con
I'm trying to add at least *some* type of pass-by-value support for
C++ classes when wrapping C++ libraries to D. I figured I could fake a
value class by using a D struct with a thunk field which matches the
size of the C++ object.
Returning a C++ object by value works in this plain C++ example (u
