DMD Backend Long-term

[Sean Kelly]

dsimcha <dsimcha at yahoo.com> wrote:
> What is the long-term plan for the current DMD backend?  I've noticed
> the
> first steps towards 64-bit support were just checked in today
> (excitement to
> the extreme).  However, the backend is under such a restrictive
> license (which
> I understand Walter is not free to change) that it has a "bus factor"
> of 1.
> If Walter were to stop maintaining it, noone else would be able to, if
> I
> understand the licensing issues correctly.
> 
> Is there a chance of these licensing issues being cleared up so that
> the
> backend can be released under a more permissive license?  If not,
> while I
> understand Walter's decision to use a backend he was familiar with in
> the
> beginning, it seems like we should abandon such a heavily encumbered
> backend
> now that it needs serious work.

I think it makes complete sense for the DigitalMars D compiler to use
the DigitalMars backend. What we really need is more community work on
compilers using other backends (GDC, LLVMDC) as well.  The language can
only benefit from having more than one compiler available.