robert at octarineparrot.com
Sat Jan 22 16:32:47 PST 2011
On 22/01/11 23:58, bioinfornatics wrote:
> They are something wrong with druntime management!!!
> Why druntime do not support gdc or ldc2?
> Its is very crap thing i hope druntime will add soon gdc support. We can send ldc and gdc patch.
> Thanks for all
> best regards
I've been talking to you on IRC about this, but I'll reiterate it here
for everyone elses benefit. Having support for each compiler in druntime
is a bad idea. This is what druntime did initially when it was forked
from tango. The trouble was that as the compiler got updated, the
runtime needed to be updated too, and the compiler and runtime became
out of sync very easily, and getting everything up to date again was a pain.
The solution to this is to have each compiler maintain its own druntime
compiler-specifics, and have the non-compiler-specific code in a main
druntime repository - this way all that is needed is to copy/paste the
compiler specific code into druntime. This works, as when the compiler
is updated, so is the compiler-specific portion of druntime and nothing
gets out of sync.
Of course, a lot of druntime isn't compiler specific, for these parts
patches should probably be applied. I'm not entirely sure where gdc and
ldc are with respect to this kind of patch, I know they both have
complete druntime implementations, but I'm sure if this kind of patch
was made (preferably in smaller, individual patches for each feature/bug
etc) it would be applied.
Of course, this is just the situation as I see it, and from memory, the
druntime folk will probably chime in and give the full story.
More information about the Digitalmars-d