On 8/21/15 7:22 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:

Where removing RTTI disables D feature's in a compromising way, I'd
start by questioning the why.

Eg:  Why does array literals need RTTI?  Looking at _d_arrayliteralTX
implementation, it only does the following with the given TypeInfo provided:

- Get the array element size (this is known at compile time)
- Get the array element type flags (calculated during the codegen stage,
but otherwise known at compile time)
- Test if the TypeInfo is derived from TypeInfo_Shared (can be done at -
you guessed it - compile time by peeking through the baseClass linked
list for a given TypeInfo type we are passing).

So we have this function that accepts a TypeInfo, but doesn't really
*need* to at all.

void* _d_arrayliteralTX(size_t length, size_t sizeelem, uint flags, bool
isshared);

Just putting it out there....

I strongly suggest we *don't* go this route. This means that any changes to what is required for the runtime to properly construct an array requires a compiler change.

A MUCH better solution:

T[] _d_arrayliteral(T)(size_t length)

Also, isn't the typeinfo now stored by the GC so it can call the dtor? Perhaps that is done in the filling of the array literal, but I would be surprised as this is a GC feature.