Migrating dmd to D?

[Rob T]

On Thursday, 28 February 2013 at 17:04:24 UTC, Marco Leise wrote:
> Am Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:32:08 -0800
> schrieb Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com>:
> 
>> The motivation for the migration is not for fun, it's not even 
>> to "eat our own dogfood". The idea is to make the front end 
>> more reliable and more flexible by using D features that help. 
>> This should make us more productive and able to fix problems 
>> faster and presumably have fewer problems in the first place.
>> 
>> There are a long list of D things that will help.
>
> In a way it means "eat your own dogfood" if you compare C++ to
> D. C++ may be lacking, but you can emulate a few things and it
> has good code analysis tools.
> Maybe I'm too pessimistic in thinking this will take a year,
> stop bug fixes and stall language design issues from being
> resolved as well as slow the compiler down notably, since
> you'll be writing easy to maintain code using Phobos and a GC
> and that is always slower than ASM, right? :p

The biggest benefit I predict that will come from an effort like 
this, is the productive change that comes about when you "eat 
your own dog food".

--rt