Is run.d going to be expand for runtime and the phobos library?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 6/13/20 6:52 PM, Dennis wrote:
> On Saturday, 13 June 2020 at 18:56:55 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> I didn't feel the need to add to provide detail because (a) most 
>> regulars in this forum already knew what I was going to say, and (b) 
>> nobody save for a few would share my opinion.
>>
>> But, I'll bite again, again to regret it.
> 
> I, for one, thought it was an interesting little write-up. Didn't expect 
> it, my guess was that you were against the idea of using D to build 
> something instead of a DSL, not the implementation.

I should add - the fact that dmd needs to be installed in order to build 
dmd is the proverbial insult added to the injury. Of course that ruined 
the carefully constructed AUTO_BOOTSTRAP option that allows building dmd 
on a fresh system.

I should also add - unless I'm looking at the wrong version, the old 
posix.mak has 654 lines. build.d has 1932 lines. But build.d also 
supplants the Windows 32/64 makefiles (589/57 lines), so the size is not 
way bigger. But that begs the question - given its liabilities, by what 
metric is build.d an improvement?