Go compiler moving from C to Go

[Walter Bright]

On 12/22/2013 12:05 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
>> There is no case where D's support for intel inline assembler is worse than
>> forcing you to use a separate assembler.
>
> My point is really that D needs to support ARM pdq to have any chance of
> getting traction in an increasingly bi-partisan (Intel/AMD and ARM)
> rather than monopolistic (Intel/AMD) data centre.


That is a good point and I definitely agree.

But I don't think this has much to do with inline assembler support - and 
supporting an assembler for ARM is simply not that hard. There's nothing tricky 
about an assembler or its syntax. There may be issues with supporting an inline 
assembler and the GDC or LDC back end interfaces, that I don't know about.