LLVM 3.0 type system changes

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 10:15:26 -0500, Caligo <iteronvexor at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Steven Schveighoffer  
> <schveiguy at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 09:33:19 -0500, Caligo <iteronvexor at gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>  On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Bernard Helyer <b.helyer at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 00:15:54 -0600, Caligo wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Bernard Helyer <b.helyer at gmail.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:41:39 -0600, Caligo wrote:
>>>> >> > Do we really need another D compiler that doesn't work?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Name me a working D2 compiler that doesn't have a front-end based
>>>> based
>>>> >> on DMD. Furthermore, name me an in progress independent  
>>>> implementation
>>>> >> further along than SDC. The only candidate is Dil.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> SDC _will_ be finished, mark my words.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Regards,
>>>> >>  Some one who remembers why they don't use the NG that much.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > Yes, I know about dil, but I wonder why you chose not to contribute  
>>>> to
>>>> > dil instead of starting a new project.  AFAIK dil is D1.
>>>>
>>>> I know about Dil. aziz is great, the project is great. However, I know
>>>> and want to use D2/Phobos. Plus, if I'm going to spend years on a
>>>> project, I may as well use stuff I like. Furthermore, SDC didn't start
>>>> out as a full compiler. Just playing around with lexing/parsing D. NIH
>>>> syndrome, too.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was aware of your "NIH syndrome", and that's why I have a problem  
>>> with
>>> this.  The main reason you are doing this is to serve your own needs,  
>>> to
>>> make yourself feel good, to earn some kind of recognition, but not to
>>> serve
>>> the community in any meaningful way.  Even if the project fails, it  
>>> will
>>> look good on your resume because you took the time to develop a  
>>> compiler.
>>> This kind of behavior is very common in the FOSS community, and it has
>>> become a disease.  It's the reason why there are thousands of dead
>>> software
>>> projects that were never completed and maintained.
>>>
>>
>> Hindsight is 20/20.  How selfish of Linus Torvalds to create Linux  
>> instead
>> of contributing to FreeBSD or Hurd.
>>
>> The thing is, this "disease" is the reason why most open-source projects
>> are started.  You can't say the ones that are successes were started any
>> differently than ones that are not.  One starts an open source project  
>> (in
>> most cases) to do something fun, interesting, and maybe create something
>> that everyone uses.  Nobody starts them because they know it's going to  
>> be a
>> success.
>>
>> What if Dil is completed and LDC is abandoned?  Will you come back here  
>> and
>> lambaste the LDC developers for not abandoning their *obviously* flawed
>> project and joining dil?  Give me a break...
>>
>> Congrats Bernard on your efforts, I hope you succeed.  We need *more*
>> compilers for D, not less.
>>
>> -Steve
>>
>
> Linux and the Hurd are very different; It's like comparing D and C++, but
> I'll bite.  How about all the people that chose to contribute to the  
> Linux
> kernel instead of starting a new OS kernel project??  It's because of  
> them
> that the Linux kernel is what it is today.  It's because of them that the
> project continued to grow and get better.  It's because of them that we
> don't have 50 different unfinished and broken OS kernels.

Maybe you missed the part where I said Hindsight is 20/20.  Good thing it  
is, so you can go back and read that part again.

It's like saying how stupid OS/2 was because they should have been more  
successful like Windows.  Yeah, would be nice to be able to predict  
success and failure.

-Steve