Any progress with inclusion of GDC into the main GCC trunk?

[Justin C Calvarese]

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Dejan Lekic wrote:
> 
>> Last time we discussed this their response was that there is no final
>> D specification, yet. Since there is one, now, I see no reasons not
>> to include D (GDC) into the GCC tree.
> 
> Do you really want D 1.000 included with something ? Isn't it better
> to be able to upgrade to the latest D version as posted on the site ?
> 
> As far as I know, DMD 1.00 had some pretty serious bugs when released.
> But the main reason for it not being included is the one of copyright.
> Since the DMD front-end will not be signed over to GCC, GDC is *not*
> the GNU D Compiler but the GDC D Compiler. Still free under GPL, but.
> 
> Note that the D language specification is copyrighted to Digital Mars,
> and is not released under any open license like the frontend code is...
> Phobos still has some licensing issues remaining with particular files.
> See http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?PhobosLicenseIssues for details.
> 
> 
> I think the best would be for a language site with offical downloads,
> like http://www.d-programming-language.org/ was meant before it died.

What do you mean by "died"?

It's still there. No, it doesn't look like it's changed any recently 
("Copyright © 2004-2006 by Digital MarsCopyright © 2004-2006 by Digital 
Mars"), but I don't know what Walter ever planned to do with this site. 
Maybe someone was going to help him add a wiki to it.

-- 
jcc7