• Andrei Alexandrescu (3/3) May 24 2013 It's there!
• nazriel (7/9) May 24 2013 Awesome presentation.
• Iain Buclaw (12/15) May 24 2013 Errata: David Nadlinger - the way it determines whether or not to
• David Nadlinger (7/22) May 24 2013 We (LDC) use the GNU as on MinGW as well, as the LLVM integrated
• David Nadlinger (5/11) May 24 2013 You do need a fairly recent, maybe even unreleased version of
• Nick Sabalausky (3/9) May 24 2013 Torrents: http://semitwist.com/download/misc/dconf2013/
• Joseph Rushton Wakeling (9/9) May 25 2013 Wonderful talk, Iain. :-)
• Iain Buclaw (7/15) May 25 2013 Walter will know the answer to this one, as well as what clauses come

Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:

It's there!

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1eyq5z/dconf_2013_day_2_talk_1_gdc_by_iain_buclaw/


Andrei

"nazriel" <spam dzfl.pl> writes:

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 11:02:52 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 It's there!

 http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1eyq5z/dconf_2013_day_2_talk_1_gdc_by_iain_buclaw/

Awesome presentation.

The most instructive so far.
Details of Internal representation of GCC - I never even heard of 
names like GIMPLE or GENERIC. Very useful and informative stuff 
even for use outside of D related tasks.

Thanks Iain! :)

Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:

On 24 May 2013 12:02, Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:
 It's there!

 http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1eyq5z/dconf_2013_day_2_talk_1_gdc_by_iain_buclaw/


 Andrei


Errata:  David Nadlinger - the way it determines whether or not to
emulate TLS is at the configure stage, where it tests if the assembler
has support for it.  If no, then TLS is emulated.  So the correct
answer would be:  It's not something handled by the compiler, if the
runtime support TLS, that is good, but we also require support in the
assembler also.  If support is there then it should be plain sailing.
I don't follow development of the GNU toolchain for Windows, but so
far as I know it isn't... yet.


--
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

"David Nadlinger" <see klickverbot.at> writes:

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 22:20:54 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 Errata:  David Nadlinger - the way it determines whether or not 
 to
 emulate TLS is at the configure stage, where it tests if the 
 assembler
 has support for it.  If no, then TLS is emulated.  So the 
 correct
 answer would be:  It's not something handled by the compiler, 
 if the
 runtime support TLS, that is good, but we also require support 
 in the
 assembler also.  If support is there then it should be plain 
 sailing.
 I don't follow development of the GNU toolchain for Windows, 
 but so
 far as I know it isn't... yet.

We (LDC) use the GNU as on MinGW as well, as the LLVM integrated 
assembler doesn't support emitting the Dwarf EH tables into COFF 
files yet. So, you should be good to go in theory, although the 
target config handling code you mentioned might also need some 
adaption – I haven't really looked at that part of GCC at all yet.

David

"David Nadlinger" <see klickverbot.at> writes:

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 22:45:35 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
 We (LDC) use the GNU as on MinGW as well, as the LLVM 
 integrated assembler doesn't support emitting the Dwarf EH 
 tables into COFF files yet. So, you should be good to go in 
 theory, although the target config handling code you mentioned 
 might also need some adaption – I haven't really looked at that 
 part of GCC at all yet.

You do need a fairly recent, maybe even unreleased version of 
binutils for SECREL32 relocations to work though, same for my 
fixes in the mingw64-w32 runtime,

David

Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:

On Fri, 24 May 2013 07:02:52 -0400
Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 It's there!
 
 http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1eyq5z/dconf_2013_day_2_talk_1_gdc_by_iain_buclaw/
 
 
 Andrei

Torrents: http://semitwist.com/download/misc/dconf2013/

"Joseph Rushton Wakeling" <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:

Wonderful talk, Iain. :-)

One question about the copyright assignment issue.  How does this 
operate in practice?  Is it going to be that the D frontend will 
simply go forward as copyright (c) FSF (which isn't a problem 
DMD-wise as their assignment agreement immediately licenses the 
code back under completely unrestricted terms), or will it 
operate on a per-release basis (where basically every time a new 
D frontend release is pushed to GCC, the copyright is also 
transferred)?

Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:

On 25 May 2013 14:52, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
<joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> wrote:
 Wonderful talk, Iain. :-)

 One question about the copyright assignment issue.  How does this operate in
 practice?  Is it going to be that the D frontend will simply go forward as
 copyright (c) FSF (which isn't a problem DMD-wise as their assignment
 agreement immediately licenses the code back under completely unrestricted
 terms), or will it operate on a per-release basis (where basically every
 time a new D frontend release is pushed to GCC, the copyright is also
 transferred)?

Walter will know the answer to this one, as well as what clauses come
under the assignment.

--
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';