dmd & gdc

[xancorreu]

Al 26/01/12 17:15, En/na H. S. Teoh ha escrit:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 01:34:39PM +0100, Trass3r wrote:
>> On Thursday, 26 January 2012 at 11:46:19 UTC, sami wrote:
>>> my question is if there thing i can do with dmd only and visa
>>> versa?
>>> what the feature of one of them over the other?
>>> what the different between them in term of inline assembly,
>>> performance, platform and bugs?
>> They share the frontend, i.e. language support is pretty much the
>> same.
>> dmd's backend is limited both in terms of performance and platform
>> support (x86 only), but it compiles D code faster.
>> gdc inherits gcc's sophisticated optimizer capabilities, but may
>> have unique bugs in its glue code.
> gdc also inherits gcc's multiplatform support, together with platform
> specific optimizations common to all gcc-based compilers.

I note that gdc is completely free software but dmd runtime is not. An 
alternative is ldc, also free.
>
>
>> On Windoze gdc is really preferable cause the dmd/dmc toolchain is
>> just crap and doesn't support x64 at all. Building gdc yourself is
>> PITA on Win though.
> Building gcc in general is a pain. It's just a little less painful on
> *nix systems, but still painful.
>
>
>> On Linux the difference isn't that big.
> Hmm, maybe somebody should write a D compiler in D. That will prove that
> D is a worthwhile language. ;-) You can then bootstrap it by compiling
> it with gdc, dmd, or whatever you wish, then recompile it with itself
> (gcc-style). All sorts of neat stuff you can do there.
>
>
> T
>
A painful is the lack of documentation: there is only API/Classes docs 
and few html pages. The books are non-free and there are not worth 
tutorials. I like D but definitively it makes me back!. Compare for 
example golang and D. Both relatively new languages (D is elder) and you 
have many more docs about golang than D. You have not a bunch of docs, 
docs you get with python or perl, but it's worthy amount.


Just my opinion,
Xan.