Why do you write D2 compiler using C++ language?

ketmar via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sat Dec 13 06:16:26 PST 2014


On Sat, 13 Dec 2014 13:55:27 +0000
ddj via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> Replacing unsupported D1 with unfinished D2 does not seem to me 
> like good idea for language.
that's right. we need D3, 'cause D2 is cluttered with legacy crap. ;-)

> But so many issues and bug fixes scares me from using it.
nobody forces you to use current developement versions. stick with the
version of your choice (2.066 for example), that's all.

> I guess, best test for language is compiler bootstrapping. 
there is ongoing project to convert DMD frontend to D. eventually this
new frontend will replace the old c++ one.

> IMHO, if you want million of users, at least no new feature 
> should be added before number of issues and bug fixes stabilize 
> to about one per month
not all D programmers wants "millon of users". i, for example, want a
language which will be great for me, not for "million of users". that's
why i think that D developement is very slow, "don't break the existing
code" is overrated and c++ interoperbility is on the bottom of the
list. but this is my own opinion, and i'm not even a major contributor.

what i want to say is that D community consists of many groups with
different visions, so it's hard to say what "we" exactly want. ;-)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20141213/127b0947/attachment.sig>


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list