Should LLVM become the default D-lang platform?

[Paulo Pinto]

On Monday, 13 January 2014 at 12:59:53 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
> On Monday, 13 January 2014 at 12:47:09 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> On 13 January 2014 21:40, Kai Nacke <kai at redstar.de> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, 13 January 2014 at 05:04:46 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12 January 2014 00:35, Kai Nacke <kai at redstar.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, 10 January 2014 at 20:51:19 UTC, Dwhatever wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This might have been brought up before but I couldn't find 
>>>>> any thread
>>>>>> about this. As things has progressed I wonder if Digital 
>>>>>> Mars DMD should
>>>>>> move over to use LLVM instead of its own code generation 
>>>>>> and compiler
>>>>>> framework.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I see it with the small amount of contributors 
>>>>>> D-language has, DMD
>>>>>> will never support anything beyond x86 as there are no 
>>>>>> resources for
>>>>>> this.
>>>>>> Also, why spend time on recreating the the code generation 
>>>>>> which has
>>>>>> already been done with LLVM? This enables this community 
>>>>>> to focus on the
>>>>>> language which is the most important part as well as 
>>>>>> supporting more and
>>>>>> future processor targets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> You currently can't get the best of all worlds in a single 
>>>>> compiler.
>>>>>
>>>>> LLVM does not support exceptions on native Win32. (Same is 
>>>>> true for Win64
>>>>> but I hope to change this.) LLVM does not support CodeView 
>>>>> debug symbols.
>>>>> Not in the format embedded in object file and not as PDB.
>>>>> In short, you loose the complete native Windows tool chain.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Is there any progress on any of these things BTW?
>>>> At some point, sooner or later, we're REALLY going to need a 
>>>> performance
>>>> compiler on Windows...
>>>>
>>>
>>> My patch for exceptions on Win64 is finally in review. I hope 
>>> to commit it
>>> soon.
>>>
>>> The Google guys are adding COFF line number support right now.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kai
>>
>>
>> Oooohh yeah, this is exciting! :D
>> How about Win32? That's really important too, particularly 
>> since DMD
>> doesn't support Win32 :/
>
> Genuine question, I have never done any windows specific 
> development: Why is Win32 a concern? Where is the overlap 
> between requiring Win32 and high performance? Isn't 64 where 
> it's at now?
>
> Is it windows tablets/phones???

The 64 bit version of Windows API is still called Win32, there 
was no change like the Win16, Win32, Win32s days.

--
Paulo