Open source dmd on Reddit!

[Walter Bright]

grauzone wrote:
> To us, this doesn't really matter. The important thing is that we can 
> build the compiler itself, and can debug it if it craps up (which 
> happens often, sorry Walter). For example, now we might be able to find 
> out on which piece of code exactly it segfaults when compiling. Oh, and 
> remember the libc issues. Now users affected by this problem can compile 
> their own binary.

Making the source available deals with the following:

1. people can be assured there's no hanky-panky going on in the code - 
no spyware, trojans, back doors, phone homing, etc.

2. if there's a serious problem, users can apply a patch themselves 
rather than wait around for me

3. if Digital Mars vanishes in a puff of greasy black smoke, users 
depending on dmd are not left holding the bag

4. makes custom ports the user cares about but nobody else does possible

5. engineers are curious and like to peek under the hood <g>.

6. hopefully it will make finding and correcting problems faster as 
people can build it with symbolic debug info, and submit patches

7. allow for two way feedback on it, which should improve the quality



What it doesn't do is:

1. allow redistribution without getting an additional license from D.M.


What I should also say is the back end was built without ever expecting 
it to be open source, hence the comments are generally notes to myself. 
It's pretty dense, not very attractive, and full of bad style and 
detritus. However, it does work.

I also need to point out that in various places there are contributions 
by Pat Nelson (initial elf work), Mike Cote and John Micco (inline 
assembler). The instruction scheduler is based on ideas of Steve Russell's.