When will D1 be finished?

[BLS]

Ary Borenszweig wrote:
> dsimcha wrote:
>> == Quote from Ary Borenszweig (ary at esperanto.org.ar)'s article
>>> Stewart Gordon wrote:
>>>> All this D2 work seems to have detracted from the task of finishing 
>>>> off D1.
>>>>
>>>> There are 15 issues nominated as d1.0blocker, of which 7* are still
>>>> outstanding, including two trackers having 39 dependencies between 
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> * Well, 8 if you include 691, fixed only for D2.
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=substring&value0-0-0=d1.0blocker 
>>
>>>>
>>>> While none of these nominations were ever answered, I think most would
>>>> agree that being finished means, at the least:
>>>>
>>>> (a) having a spec that the public agrees to be complete and consistent
>>>> (b) all language features implemented
>>>> (c) all of the most serious known bugs and most of the others fixed
>>>>
>>>> 677 and 690 are shortcomings in department (a). (OK, 690 seems to be
>>>> almost fixed now, but I'm not sure.)  302 is a failure under (b).  
>>>> While
>>>> it's otherwise hard to lay hands on anything particular as why (c) is
>>>> yet to be achieved, that just over 2/3 of 340's dependencies are still
>>>> open at least says something.
>>>>
>>>> This leaves 317 and 342, which are filed as enhancement requests, but
>>>> which people felt important enough that they ought to be in the initial
>>>> D1 distribution.  342 is straightforward and, while 317 is a much 
>>>> bigger
>>>> task, at least it has progressed (albeit slowly).
>>>>
>>>> But generally, it's about time D1 got a move on....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm made to wonder whether, if 1.0 had been held back until it could be
>>>> a practical rather than just symbolic milestone, it would be at both by
>>>> now.
>>>>
>>>> I've just thought, given this brief inconclusive discussion
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/qayz9w
>>>> ...when we reach this practical milestone, maybe we could call it D 
>>>> 1.1?
>>>>
>>>> Stewart.
>>> I think the major problem with this is that D2 has the same codebase as
>>> D1, so D2 will inherit most of it's bug, like forward references.
>>> Anyone wants to start an open source project to make a new front-end for
>>> D1? :)
>>
>> This one is interesting and looks reasonably active:: 
>> http://code.google.com/p/dil/
>>
>> It's a D1 front end written in D, and looks reasonably active.  It 
>> also solves
>> another problem:  Although it's not a particularly urgent thing, 
>> eventually D
>> compilers should be written in D.  First, it would be one less things 
>> for skeptics
>> to complain about.
> 
> Cool! I thought all of the D compilers were using DMD's front-end. I'll 
> take a look at it and try to help.

Just a few notes.
1 - DIL is able to lex and parse (partially) D2
2 - DIL is GPL 3
3 - semantic analysis requires some work
4 - DIL has a couple of very useful extensions, likewise D to XML
5 - compared to the C++ frontend DIL sources are readable and quite easy 
to extend. (save D to XML library information into Berkeley DB XML/ nice 
to have IDE feature/, just my opinion)

Björn