Which patches/mods exists for current versions of the DMD parser?

[Marco Leise via Digitalmars-d]

Am Mon, 08 Sep 2014 15:22:03 +0000
schrieb "Ola Fosheim Grøstad"
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>:

> On Monday, 8 September 2014 at 15:09:27 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> > It is not about D community but about yourself. Do _you_ want 
> > to be viewed as a valuable member of community? Do _you_ want 
> > to receive on topic responses to your threads?
> 
> I only want to receive a response on this thread from community 
> members who are willing to share their patches! Your contribution 
> to this thread is counter productive.
> 
> Ketmar is a noble example that I'd encourage others to follow. 
> More people like him would bring D out of stagnation.
> 
> > If answer is yes, you will consider people expectation as much 
> > as a license.
> 
> No, I don't consider other people's disparage expectations on 
> this topic. I consider the orignal author's choice of license. I 
> am sure he considered the licensing-options and stands for his 
> own choice. If he does not, then an explanation from the original 
> author is in place.
> 
> >> We add to the eco system. We don't detract from it.
> >
> > Bullshit. Any kind of forking wastes most valuable resource 
> > open source world can possibly have - developer attention.
> 
> Uhm, no. I would not use D in it's current incarnation so I need 
> to modify it. Ketmar and I are not DMD developers. We are 
> currently digging into the code base. Modifying the parser is a 
> good way to learn the AST. Maybe we one day will become DMD 
> developers, but this attitude you and others are exposing in this 
> thread and the bug-report-patch thread aint sexy. It's a turn off.
> 
> What you are doing is telling prospective contributors that this 
> community is about cohesive military discipline. Totalitarian 
> regimes tend to run into trouble. I most definitely will never 
> join a cult that expose it as an ideal. I'm not one of your 
> lieutenants. Sorry.

And now we all calm down a little, ok? The D community is as
diverse as the language and even if three people yell in the
same tone, it doesn't mean everyone else believes the same.

On topic: Adding more ways to instantiate templates, I see no
value in. It only causes confusion for the reader.
Short syntax for declaring auto/const/immutable variables is
nice, because it probably saves typing and variable names are
all left aligned. You might want to check if you can really
fulfill the goal. E.g. sometimes your expression evaluates to
something const which you cannot store in an immutable
variable. Whereas a const variable can receive an immutable.
How do you go about pointers? I.e. Does :== declare an
immutable(char)[] or an immutable(char[])?
New Unicode operators. Personally I find them sexy, because √
is a short, well known operator. But you may find people that
still require ASCII for source code. Also this specific
rewrite requires std.math to be imported, and like ^^ it will
cause bewildered looks when something breaks for a built-in
operator. So if you want to push this make it an operator
that is understood by the front-end like "!" or "~". Also you
might want to consider adding .opSqrt for consistency.
For array length we already have .length and .opDollar. Even
more ways to express the length? Granted it is one of the
most common properties you ask for in D code, but #arr looks
very unusual. Well, it is your fork I'd say. If you ever make
any pull requests be sure to propose one feature at a time, D
is already short on reviewers that understand the effects of
the code changes. And be sure to document the corner cases
you dealt with, especially with the :== operator.

-- 
Marco