x86_64 support please!

[Jascha Wetzel]

what's so bad about cross compilation?
compilers have intermediate code generation for decades, therefore
having different code generation and -optimization backends is a good
thing. am i wrong?

BLS wrote:
> Tomas Lindquist Olsen schrieb:
>> BLS wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Seems to be a good chance to start re-implementing the complete D
>>> Tool-Chain Development in D.
>>> (Instead of using C and ASM)
>>> IMO D 2.0 should be implemented in D (seperated from 1.x) , even if the
>>> 2.0 Backend is closed source.
>>> Bjoern
>>>
>>>
>>> Kiriakos Alexoglou schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Please Walter add support for x86_64!
>>>>
>>>> I use Suse Linux 10.0 and developing in Qt and
>>>> I want to try make Qt bindings for dmd.
>>>>
>>>> The bindings that exist for Qt right now,
>>>> can all work with x86_64 architectures.
>>>>
>>>> In my personal opinion x86_64 support is
>>>> more important than adding additional feutures to dmd.
>>>>
>>>> Right now I have to switch to the 32 bit version of Qt 4.2
>>>> and start making the bindings for it. I have no other choice.
>>>>
>>>> There are so many additional registers waiting to get used
>>>> by all of us! :-)
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the exciting D language
>>>> you offered to all of us!
>>>> Keep up the good work!!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *I think the D Logo with the Dolphin on it at
>>>> http://www.sukimashita.com/d/ is very nice!!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> By using the LLVM backend D could be implemented in D.
>> LLVM is C++ but you can output a ASM-like text file instead. I'm not sure
>> how much this would hurt performance, but I'm guessing it's not that
>> much.
>> Also compared to what is gained it's a small price to pay.
>>
>> LLVM has a bytecode VM, JIT and some pretty neat optimisation technology.
>>
>> I think it could be interesting...
> 
> NO !
> NO VM,NET or D to WhatTheHeck cross compilation
> 
> I simply vote for a D implemented in D. Frontend,  Backend, Linker ....
> the complete Toolchain..... 32/64 bit at your choice.
> The impact of having D in D for Tools like IDEs is significant.
> And :
> I would prefer to have all  *D Tools implemented as DDL*  guess why ?
> Bjoern
> 
>