Official compiler

[David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 18 February 2016 at 17:56:32 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> […] if you want to be writing scripts in D (which is really 
> useful), you need rdmd, which means using dmd

You can use rdmd with ldmd2 just as well (and presumably gdmd 
too).

> New users are frequently impressed by how fast dmd compiles 
> code, and it's a big selling point for us. It's only later that 
> benchmarking comes into play, and if want to do that, then use 
> gdc or ldc. The download page already says to use gdc or ldc if 
> you want better optimization.

I'd claim that an equal number of people is put off by the 
sometimes abysmal performance of optimized DMD output in their 
initial tests and first toy projects.

> dmd is a clear winner as far as development goes.

Clear only to somebody with x86-centric vision. I'm not claiming 
that the somewhat lower compile times aren't good for 
productivity. But being able to easily tap into the rich LLVM 
ecosystem or even just targeting the most widely used CPU 
architecture (in terms of units) is also something not to be 
forgotten when considering the development process.

  — David