Honey, I shrunk the build times

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d]

On 7 June 2015 at 10:49, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Sunday, 7 June 2015 at 08:12:11 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>
>> you'd think with dmd's module system achieving compiler-level parallelism
>> wouldn't be so difficult.
>>
>
> IIRC, Walter stated that he wanted to add it but decided that it would be
> too much of a pain to do in C++ and is waiting for us to fully switch to
> ddmd before tackling that problem. Similarly, Daniel Murphy has ideas on
> how to improve CTFE (which would vastly help compilation speeds), but it
> would be so much easier to do in D that he put it off until we switch to
> ddmd. It would surprise me if there are other speed improvements that have
> been put off, simply because they'd be easier to implement in D than C++.
> So, I expect that there's a decent chance that we'll be able to better
> leverage the design of the language to improve its compilation speed once
> we've officially switched the reference compiler to D (and we'll probably
> get there within a release or two; the main hold-up is how long it'll take
> gdc and ldc to catch up with 2.067).
>
>
I wouldn't have thought that not moving to 2.067 would be a hold-up (there
is nothing in that release that blocks building DDMD as it is *now*).  But
I have been promised time and again that there will be more effort
(infrastructure?) put in to help get LDC and GDC integrated into the
testing process for all new PRs.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20150607/2e8168a5/attachment.html>