Compilation strategy

[Rob T]

On Tuesday, 18 December 2012 at 02:17:25 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/17/2012 6:13 PM, Rob T wrote:
>> Your suggestion concerning the use of zip files is a good 
>> idea, although you
>> mention the encryption algo is very weak, but is there any 
>> reason to use a weak
>> encryption algo, and is there even a reason to bother 
>> maintaining compatibility
>> with the common zip format?
>
> Using standard zip tools is a big plus.

Yes, but why limit yourself in this way? I suppose you could 
provide a choice between different formats, but that's the wrong 
approach. The compiler should instead be restructured to allow D 
users to supply their own functionality in the form of user 
defined plugins, that way you won't have to bother second 
guessing what people need or don't need, or provide generic one 
size fits all solutions that no one likes, and you'll gain an 
army of coders who'll take D into very surprising directions that 
no one could possibly predict.

Another nice fix would be to separate the CTFE interpreter out of 
the compiler as a loadable library so it can be used outside of 
the compiler for embedded D scripting, and possibly even for JIT 
applications.

I expect there are a few more significant improvements that could 
be made simply by making the compiler less monolithic and more 
modularized.

Easier said than done, but it should be done at some point 
because the advantages are very significant.

--rt