dsimcha at yahoo.com
Tue Aug 17 11:07:03 PDT 2010
== Quote from Iain Buclaw (ibuclaw at ubuntu.com)'s article
> Current developments that are taking priority first (in order) are:
> * Updating/Uploading packages in Debian and Ubuntu - as of writing, package
> is currently being built in Debian, with a predicted success across all 14
> supported architectures. >:-)
> * Port GDC to GCC-4.4 - nearly done, with one or two show-stoppers remaining
> with static chain decls and exprs.
> * Sort out the outstanding merges of D 1.062 and 1.063 - which somewhere
> along the line lost 64bit support. !!! - barely even started looking into it
> Current blockers that need to be organised out (in my opinion) before D2 can
> be emerged are:
> * Integration into current GCC patches, which will require a regeneration of
> _all_ patches in the patch directory (even those I cannot account for as
> * Figuring out what internals need to be migrated from the current phobos2
> directory, what needs to keep.
> * A general consensus needs to be reached on how we should handle ASM
> version specifiers. Gnu_InlineAsmX86? D_InlineAsmX86? 64bit? Sort out
> calling conventions?
> * GDC Driver updates to tie the whole thing together - the easy bit. ;-)
> Anything I missed? Should I be pushing D2 further up the stack of my list of
It's tough to say where D2 support should be prioritized relative to packaging, D1
fixes, general infrastructure improvements, etc. My biased opinion (since I
personally don't use D1 and have tons of code written for the latest versions of
D2) is that getting a basically-working D2.048 compiler is by far the highest
priority. I personally (definitely NOT speaking for the rest of the community)
have no use whatsoever for a D compiler that doesn't work with code written for
DMD 2.048. However, I'm sure D1 users would beg to differ. I guess it really
comes down to the ratio of D1 users to D2 users.
More information about the D.gnu