dmd 2.068, 2.069, 2.0xx Evil Plan going forward

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 09:02:03PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> 2.068 - resolve remaining regressions and release

Are there any remaining naming issues (introduced in this release, that
is, not stuff that's already out there -- let's not touch those anymore)
that people are dying to fix? If there are, we should get them in now
before the names become set in stone.


> 2.069 - translate to D. No new features, no refactoring. Only
> regression fixes and what's already in HEAD. This should give us a
> solid baseline. It also means that open PRs that address other issues
> will not be pulled for 2.069.

Sounds like a good idea, give ourselves a whole release to stabilise
self-hosting D, without anything else to distract our efforts.


> Perhaps we should name this 2.100, to signify such a milestone.
> 
> 2.101+ -
> 1. Take advantage of D features to improve quality.
> 2. Go to full lazy semantic analysis of imports, rather than the
> current "analyze them all"
> 3. Rethink what "speculative instantiation" of templates means so we
> can have a coherent process of compiling them.

For the sake of those of us who aren't so familiar with dmd internals:
what is speculative instantiation and why does matter so much?


> 4. Redo CTFE interpreter so it only rarely needs to allocate memory.
> This was already done for constant folding, but now it's time for the
> rest of the interpreter.

Yes, please! This would significantly widen the practical usage of D
compile-time features in real-world projects.


> 5. Get rid of reliance on the global error count. This has been mostly
> done, it just hast to be finished.

Does this involve cleaning up the handling of error-gagging too?


> 6. Convert the back end to D as well.

Will a D backend still be under the same license encumbrances as the
current one?


T

-- 
Why are you blatanly misspelling "blatant"? -- Branden Robinson