Red Hat's issues in considering the D language

[Jerry via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 16:41:58 UTC, Jesse Phillips 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 16:30:15 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 10:15:26 UTC, hardreset 
>> wrote:
>>> Is moving to LLVM backend or LDC something that is on the 
>>> roadmap?
>>
>> What does it mean to "move" to LDC? Why can't you use LDC now?
>
> People that want to use D, want to use the latest and greatest. 
> The reference compiler moves the fastest so they want the 
> reference compiler to be switched to a different backend. Why a 
> FOSS back end is required to use D depends on the person, 
> usually it is political.

Any other backend would be better. DMD with -O takes over an hour 
for my project to compile. In comparison LDC with -O3 takes less 
than a minute and produces a faster binary. It doesn't really 
make sense to increase the workload maintaining 2-3 different 
compilers when D is already lacking manpower.