DDMD and such.

[Gor Gyolchanyan]

Imagine also having parsers for other languages (like C) as a library solution.
being able to translate C code to D code in the form of a library
solution at compile-time means the best C-compatibility ever!

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Gor Gyolchanyan
<gor.f.gyolchanyan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Damn! a library lexer and parser of D! I think we'll eventually drop
> the "compile-time only" restriction from mixins! :-)
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2011 17:09:24 Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>>> I know, this has been discussed earlier, but i don't quite understand
>>> the real reason why isn't DMD's front-end being written in D.
>>> Existing DDMD is pointless (and i think abandoned), because it's just
>>> a plain rewrite with the same C-style constructs and completely
>>> rewriting it to be a correct D code would mean being unable to get the
>>> bug-fixes on DMD.
>>> I remember, that Walter said about the problems with compatibility
>>> with the back-end, that would arise.
>>> But isn't D supposed to be binary compatible with C?
>>> AFAIK the only extra thing to be done would be to provide a C facade
>>> around the D front-end, that would be given to the back-end.
>>> Why not?
>>
>> I would point out that there is an intention to eventually get a D lexer and
>> parser into Phobos so that tools can take advantage of them. Those could
>> eventually lead to a frontend in D but would provide benefits far beyond simply
>> having the compiler in D.
>>
>> - Jonathan M Davis
>>
>