Why is 64-bit dmd not built as part of the Windows release?

[Meta]

On Tuesday, 15 May 2018 at 16:01:28 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
> I don't know why even bother with 32-bit dmd to begin with, but 
> at least there should be an option.
>
> I just spent 45min trying to build 64-bit dmd on Windows. It 
> wasn't fun. "Isn't it just make -f win64.mak?", I hear you ask. 
> Yes. If you want a version with debug messages turned on. It 
> took me 45min to learn that disabling those is... non-trivial.
>
> As it turns out, trying to build dmd yourself from the released 
> tag and replacing the .exe from the installer by the one you 
> created works, unless:
>
> 1. You remove -debug
> 2. You add -O
>
> If you do #1 or #2, then the produced dmd.exe doesn't work. At 
> all. 32 *or* 64 bits. And this is something you need to edit 
> the makefile for, trying to do that from the command line was 
> an exercise in futility.
>
> "How does the installer-built version work then?", I again hear 
> you ask. No idea. Debug 64-bit dmd it is!
>
> I *would* try and add a 64-bit dmd to the installer, but 
> apparently to build the Windows installer you need a special 
> Windows box commisioned by the Vatican and blessed by the Pope 
> himself.
>
> Atila

I haven't tried 64-bit builds in awhile, but every time I try to 
build on Windows I run into some new issue that I have to work 
through. Just recently there was a check added to the build 
process which fails if there are Windows line endings in any 
source files, which IMO is insane since you're just building, not 
committing.