On Wednesday, 15 August 2018 at 06:21:39 UTC, Rel wrote:
>> There are other ways to do minimalist programming in D without -betterC. See https://dlang.org/changelog/2.079.0.html#minimal_runtime
>
> Well, what would be the difference between betterC and writing my own minimal runtime?

It depend on what you want to do.  The "minimal runtime" approach, for lack of a better description, means you are free to implement just the language features you need in a pay-as-you-go fashion.  I prefer it as a way to incrementally port D to a new platform.

You originally stated that you didn't want to link in the C runtime, but I see you are using Windows which seems to have a different definition of what the comprises the C Runtime than Linux.  In Linux, the C Runtime and the C Standard Library are different things, but Windows seems to think they are the same.

I guess I'll stop hear, as I'm probably getting off an a tangent you don't really care about.

Just be aware that dmd calls the linker automatically, and automatically links in the C Runtime and the C Standard Library.  If you want to avoid those, you'll probably have to compile with -c and link separately.

> For the time being doing betterC looks preferable, so I don't need to reimplement some runtime stuff. Just recompiling the same program with empty object module gives me few errors like size_t, string and etc not implemented in object module.

Yes, you'll need to copy implementation code from https://github.com/dlang/druntime/blob/master/src/object.d if you want those features.  With this approach you become responsible for the runtime implementation, and with great power comes great responsibility.

Mike