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