Mono-D v0.4.9 - Rough formatting capability

Jacob Carlborg doob at me.com
Fri Jan 25 05:43:46 PST 2013


On 2013-01-25 13:01, Bruno Medeiros wrote:

> If I was going with that approach I likely would rather port the MonoD
> parser since it looks just as good, if not better, and C# would be
> easier to port to Java than D.
> But the descent.compiler experience (parser ported from DMD's parser)
> put me off that approach of porting from a parser in another language
> (although the VisualD parser might have less shortcomings than using the
> DMD parser since at least VisualD's parser is designed for IDE use). I
> want to have more control over the parser, and be able to effect my own
> changes in it (something tricky if you're porting - unless you give up
> the porting at some point, and just fork your own version and use ir
> from there)

I didn't say anything about porting :) I was suggesting you integrate 
the VisualD parser without porting it. That's why I suggested the one in 
VisualD and not the one in Mono-D.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg


More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce mailing list