Is the D community lacking development tools?

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2012-05-22 18:22, shd wrote:

> I agree in almost everything what Jacob said.
> I would say, that binding generator improvement is even higher than
> testing framework though.

Absolutely, I just wrote the list in no particular order. But at the 
same time you need to be able to test the binding generator :)

> Tools are good, but making compiler and library more reliable is crucial thing.

Yeah, it always comes back to the compiler. And preferably it should be 
written in D as a library.

> Still, some kind of library which would share (AST or i don't know how
> to name that) implementation with compilers front-end is just after
> that.
> I'm not really sure if that's what you mean (since you mentioned more
> high-level features), but without separating some code out from
> compiler, different IDEs will rewrite the same code again and again.
> And i guess we all agree that single IDE wont satisfy needs of
> everyone (of course  there is more uses of library like that than only
> IDEs)

That was that I meant. One compiler library every tool can take 
advantage of. The actual compiler should use the library as well, of course.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg