D compiler layers

[retard]

Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:22:26 +1300, Tim Matthews wrote:

> In my opinion there should be one set of libraries (not limited to 2
> layers) that is generalized enough to be used by any compiler, ide or
> other tools for d too.
> 
> Not too long ago I noticed yet another "I've made a d ide" post. The
> problem is that similar code used by other ides, and compilers is re
> written again every time and each have a long life of bug fixing until
> they can read the majority of d code and still have its flaws.
> 
> D.R.Y (don't repeat yourself). Even M$ is a victim of this when visual
> studio ide thinks your C++ code is in error but the compiler handles it
> just fine.

But many of us use D as a hobby and attend basic compiler construction 
classes at schools even as we speak. It would be boresome to use existing 
code and wouldn't boost the learning process. It's also very common that 
the implementation languages or the licenses differs. A set of libraries 
would have to be written in some portable language like C. Most of us 
want to use D instead. Some of us like BSD, some GPL, and a small part 
even develops proprietary tools for D.

Some might say that it's even benefical to have a rich set of tools - if 
you run into ICE, another D compiler/IDE might not fall into that trap. 
It also helps fixing the spec since currently it's not possible to 
develop two nearly identical compilers (without using dmdfe) because even 
dmd violates the spec in many cases. And when you ask Walter how it /
should/ work, he remains silent (for instance in the case of protection 
attributes when inheriting from a base class - class foo : protected bar)