D as A Better C?

[Mike Parker]

On 2/12/2014 6:13 AM, Xinok wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 19:43:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> What do you think?
>
> I don't do embedded programming, so take my opinion with a grain of salt...
>
> Rather than making this a compiler switch, I think it would be more
> beneficial to branch this off as a new project, essentially building a
> new compiler. Similarly, it would contain that subset of features which
> are practical for embedded programming and strip out the rest. Then
> likewise to VisualD, make it an "official" repository on GitHub.
>
> The benefit of having a separate project dedicated to embedded
> programming is the ability to retain a standard library without
> convoluting the rest of the D ecosystem. A slim standard library could
> be developed, mimicking (or even branched from) Phobos, but optimized
> for embedded systems. As DMD is updated, the changes would be merged
> into "embedded D", but otherwise the two would be maintained
> independently of one another.

One of the points is to avoid the need of a standard library. Besides, 
making a separate compiler adds more maintenance overhead and is a sure 
way to encourage fragmentation.