Conspiracy Theory #1

[Travis Boucher]

Don wrote:
> Travis Boucher wrote:
>> retard wrote:
>>> Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:03:46 -0700, Travis Boucher wrote:
>>>
>>>> The future of D to me is very uncertain.  I see some very bright
>>>> possibilities in the embedded area and the web cluster area (these are
>>>> my 2 areas, so I can't speak on the scientific applications).  However
>>>> the limited targets for the official DMD, and the adoption lag in gdc
>>>> (and possibly ldc) are issues that need to be addressed before I can 
>>>> see
>>>> the language getting some of the real attention that it deserves.
>>>
>>> Agreed, basically you would need to go the gdc/gcc route since e.g. arm/
>>> mips backends on llvm aren't as mature and clearly digitalmars only 
>>> targets x86.
>>
>> I hope sometime after the D2 specs are finalized, and dmd2 stablizes, 
>> Walter decides to make the dmd backend Boost or MIT licensed (or 
>> similar).
> 
> AFAIK, he can't. He doesn't own exclusive rights to it. The statement 
> that it's not guaranteed to work after Y2K is a Symantec requirement, it 
> definitely doesn't come from Walter!
> 

Sadly thats even more reason to focus on non-digital mars compilers. 
Personally I like the digital mars compiler, its relatively simple 
(compared to the gcc code mess), but legacy symantec stuff could be a 
bit of a bottleneck.