Mid-term vision review

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 23:59:52 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 23:47:48 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 22:46:31 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>>> On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 20:56:09 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>>>> On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 19:45:29 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>>>>> The reliance on GDC/LDC to produce production-level 
>>>>> binaries(i.e, optimized) and the actual people working on 
>>>>> them really is worrisome. If Iain or Kai decided one day to 
>>>>> leave D, it would be a very big blow I think.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. And considering there is no hope that we bring dmd's 
>>>> backend up to speed with GCC or LLVM (let's be realistic one 
>>>> second) what is even more worrisome is how little they are 
>>>> integrated in the workflow.
>>>
>>> The best way to help would probably be to work on contributor 
>>> guides/documentation. They don't seem to have much of either 
>>> of these - or I'm blind(good possibility.)
>>>
>>
>> Even if so what is the point ? That is completely wasted work. 
>> It is already done elsewhere.
>>
>> That is aggravated pathological NIH syndrome right there.
>
> Maybe I'm misreading, but I don't see how documentation is NIH 
> syndrome.

Like always in economy, the question is compared to what ? 
Writing documentation on that thing, compared to what valuable 
use of people's time.

Considering there is no hope for this to compete with other 
backends in term of supported targets, the only reason you'd have 
to invest in there is NIH syndrome.