Right now, what's the most important for the success and adoption of D?

[Jari-Matti Mäkelä]

Jascha Wetzel wrote:

> Aziz K. wrote:
>> That's what I think, too. By the way, my compiler (only front-end with
>> no semantic analysis yet) has over 13000 lines as I speak, and it's
>> pretty awesome code :P
> 
> for the sake of competition, since we're talking about a lexer and
> parser, here is one that has about 2000 lines of easily maintainable code
> ;) http://seatd.mainia.de/

Your web page says "It provides access to an AST and an ASG of a D source
file". So does the ASG part mean that it creates pointers from identifiers
to declarations using the D scope rules? Is it possible to modify that data
structure later or should one just clone the AST if further processing is
needed?

Comparing LOC is a bit pointless since the SEATD parser is machine
generated - dil could be made shorter too with e.g. the coming macros
without losing much readability. You mentioned compact editors in the other
thread. One downside of SEATD is that the resulting binary is about twice
as large as my vim binary. Doesn't sound very compact to me, but maybe that
wasn't the point.