DDL should become official part of DMD

[BLS]

JPF wrote:
> BLS wrote:
>> c topic.. what do you think ?
>>
>> IMO : this could be a D "killer feature".
> 
> I don't know how complicated that would be (licensing issues, ...), but
> as a developer / user I would really like it: It's needed to implement
> stuff like addins in a convenient way. And it would be great if we could
> finally use statically loaded shared libraries instead of static
> compilation of everything (I guess that needs compiler integration, so
> it's a good reason to include DDL with dmd ;-)). Also, if you look at
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dll.html#Dcode the current way to do D
> DLLs for use with D code is not very developer friendly. Exporting flat
> functions like getMyClass just doesn't feel right. Now compare that with
> DDLs features: http://www.dsource.org/projects/ddl/wiki/AboutDDL .DDL
> clearly wins. By the way, I guess most of you know that already, but
> http://h3.team0xf.com/devlog/?p=12 has an updated version of DDL with a
> new linker.

I can hear you , but it seems that we are pretty alone.
License ?????
The compiler deps stuff is coming out of the same developer house... 
...without trouble..

... now DMD comes along with such a license MIX nobody really 
understands but W. insist that everything else has to be public domain.
That stinks !!!!