interest in Static Analysis for D ?

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 15:33:30 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
> On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 15:28:14 UTC, ketmar wrote:
>> if it will be independent utility -- yes. dmdfe part -- no.
>
> It would relay on the parser of the dmdfe, and parts of dmd's 
> semantic analysis.
>
> DMD will be much nicer to work with the facility envision.
> As I see it there is little reason for writing yet another D 
> parser.

the more features dmdfe will get, the slower (and more 
memory-hungry) it will become. so i don't want any fancy (and 
even useful ;-) features in dmd itself (that's what i meant when 
i wrote "dmdfe"). if it will be separate app based on dmdfe -- 
sure, it would be great!