D compiler as part of GCC

[Walter Bright]

Jerry Quinn wrote:
> My personal desire is to implement (and track) the 2.0 language since
> I would like to see that feature set available through GCC.  Second,
> by the time a working front end becomes part of GCC, the 2.0 language
> will likely be complete.
> 
> One question I have (of many) is whether a different name should be
> used.  If this is called GDC there will be some confusion with the
> current GDC.  What thoughts do you all have?
> 
> In general is there interest in this project, especially contributing
> to it?

Obviously, I can't help you with a clean room reimplementation, but I do 
wish you every success with the project. I can also help with 
specification problems that will inevitably arise.