D vs Go in real life

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On 04/12/13 23:14, Walter Bright wrote:
> I'm opposed to it.
>
> For one example, a year ago I had to make dmd work on Win64. LLVM didn't support
> Win64. I would have been stymied.
>
> It is very good for D to have 3 equivalent implementations - dmd, gdc, and ldc.
> Each has its strengths and weaknesses. It makes for a very strong ecosystem.

The problem we have is that while all 3 implementations are equivalent, some 
implementations are more equivalent than others ... :-)

Sometimes this can be a downstream problem -- people testing code with DMD but 
not LDC or GDC, so bugs or issues don't get recognized (or they do, but the bugs 
don't get reported to the compiler teams).  But more fundamentally, it's that if 
you're running git-HEAD DMD, you're running the very latest code, whereas if 
you're running git-HEAD LDC or GDC, you're still running only the latest stable 
frontend/runtime/standard library releases.

So, that means that if you need the ability to get fast turnaround on bugfixes 
or new features, you HAVE to run DMD.

That really seems a constraint that we ought to be free of.