Migrating D front end to D - post Dconf

[Daniel Murphy]

"David Nadlinger" <see at klickverbot.at> wrote in message 
news:bwkwvbjdykrnsdezprls at forum.dlang.org...
> On Saturday, 11 May 2013 at 17:23:53 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
>> That... doesn't sound very nice to me.  How much of phobos are we
>> realistically going to need?
>
> All of it? Well, not quite, but large parts at least.
>
> If we are going to stick to the C subset of the language, there is little 
> point in translating it to D in the first place.
>

I disagree.  Phobos is great, but there are thousands of things in the 
language itself that make it much more pleasant and effective than C++.

> Of course, there will be some restrictions arising from the fact that the 
> code base needs to work with D versions from a year back or so. But to me 
> duplicating the whole standard library inside the compiler source seems 
> like maintenance hell.
>
> David

I agree.  But I was thinking much longer term compatibility, and a much 
smaller chunk of phobos.