12:34:43Shinmeraname mangling and vtables for the most part, yeah.
12:35:20sthalikhope you won't actually bother coercing lisp lambdas to c++11 lambdas
12:35:20ShinmeraAs p_l suggested, if the DWARF doesn't influence the produced binary, one aspect instead of replicating a compiler would be to parse out the DWARF info and use that to feed the information needed to call methods.
12:35:42sthalikthen again, with templated code your scheme's not very useful
12:37:38sthalikthat templated code is more common than exceptions, isn't a controversial view
12:38:56p_lDWARF4 does cover templated code and lambdas, though
12:39:04p_lWell, you'd need some extra code to parse it out
12:39:43_deathwith templates you could support just already existing instantiations..
13:00:10p_l_death: you can't support non-compiled instantations
13:01:50_deathright, unless you write a C++ compiler :)
0:16:52asarchFrom the point of view of Lisp, what's wrong with C++?
0:17:12asarchI've read a lot of bad jokes about this programming language
0:17:35asarchBut I still cannot realize the reason of it
0:18:43aethasarch: C++ pretends that it's on the low-level side of the high-level languages, but it has high-level syntax, which makes metaprogramming painful. It also inherits all of the security/safety flaws of C by being compatible with C.