why a part of D community do not want go to D2 ?

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2010-11-11 20:28, Sean Kelly wrote:
> Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
>>
>> I you don't think that support for other compilers should be in druntime
>> what do you suggest?
>
> They should be in their own SVN repository somewhere.  I think one could even argue that the DMD compiler runtime (src/rt in druntime) should be maintained separately.  It's quite convenient to have the druntime repository produce a fully functional runtime however, and what better compiler to support than the reference compiler?
>
> To be clear, I'm not vehemently opposed to other compiler runtimes living in the druntime repository.  It's simply proven to be a bad model.  In Tango, when a new DMD version was released I merged changes into the Tango runtime (a task which wouldn't admittedly exist with druntime), and then I speculatively made the same changes to the other runtimes as well.  In places where compiler support was needed, I left the new code versioned out with a comment to deal with it when that compiler was updated.  All in all, it meant a lot of work for me, and it was difficult to maintain a fully functional source tree.  I know the alternative is that each compiler team may have to sync with changes to druntime (at least core/* and gc/*), but this is a rather small and stable set of modules compared to the D1 Phobos arrangement.
>
>  From a functional perspective, the other issue is that the compiler doesn't like something having a module name of "rt.blah" but living in ldcrt/blah.d.  This is a problem with maintaining multiple GCs as well.  Symlinks are an option on Posix, but as far as I know that isn't possible on Windows, so files would have to be copied around during the build process depending on which compiler or GC was selected.

Ok, thanks for explaining.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg