Should LLVM become the default D-lang platform?

Dwhatever not at real.com
Fri Jan 10 13:02:09 PST 2014


On Friday, 10 January 2014 at 20:59:35 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 10 January 2014 20:54, John Colvin 
> <john.loughran.colvin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, 10 January 2014 at 20:51:19 UTC, Dwhatever wrote:
>>>
>>> This might have been brought up before but I couldn't find 
>>> any thread
>>> about this. As things has progressed I wonder if Digital Mars 
>>> DMD should
>>> move over to use LLVM instead of its own code generation and 
>>> compiler
>>> framework.
>>>
>>> As I see it with the small amount of contributors D-language 
>>> has, DMD will
>>> never support anything beyond x86 as there are no resources 
>>> for this. Also,
>>> why spend time on recreating the the code generation which 
>>> has already been
>>> done with LLVM? This enables this community to focus on the 
>>> language which
>>> is the most important part as well as supporting more and 
>>> future processor
>>> targets.
>>
>>
>> This comes up regularly. It's already been done. Ldc *is* dmd 
>> with llvm
>> backend. Gdc is the same idea but with the gcc framework.
>
> Indeed. But naturally I'd suggest they move to GCC.  ;-)

I see LLVM as a better choice because the license is less 
intrusive.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list