Performance dmd vs ldc2

[John Colvin]

On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 19:08:59 UTC, Temtaime wrote:
> Why not LLVM ? LLVM is open and well-optimized.
> Writing own backend is a suicide and wasting of energy.

1) Because the current backend compiles code very fast, reducing 
development turnaround time (particularly useful for testing 
changes to druntime/phobos). It also has good native windows 
support.

2) Because the compiler itself is quick to compile. This allows a 
very quick response time even for quite wide-reaching changes. It 
also makes the auto-tester more useful.

3) Because Walter likes working with it. It's his backend and dmd 
is overall his project.

4) Because it's already happened/happening. We have dmd with the 
llvm backend. It's called ldc.