DMD backend quality (Was: Re: DIP 1031--Deprecate Brace-Style Struct Initializers--Community Review Round 1 Discussion)

[drug]

On 2/18/20 6:30 PM, jxel wrote:
> 
> The problem is that efforts are divided as a result. Work still has to 
> be maintained on the backend. As someone showed there's multiple PR that 
> have stagnated because no one is willing to look at them that modify the 
> backend to comply with the C ABI. Bugs that have been open for years. 
> Bugs that don't exist in LDC, even though that's basically being 
> maintained by one person. If people want a fast backend, you can build a 
> custom backend for performance in LLVM, a few projects have done this 
> already. But honestly that's a waste of time. The slowest part of D is 
> the frontend and CTFE not the backend in LDC. That's not even mentioning 
> the constant out of memory problems I experience and have to try to 
> optimize the compiler for with my code.
> 

IMO you are wrong if you think that dropping dmd will increase man power 
in ldc/gdc land. Who wants to contribute to ldc/gdc already doing it. It 
is open source - people contribute to projects they like, you can not 
tell them what to do. Efforts are not divided - if dmd would be dropped 
people who doesn't contribute to ldc/gdc won't start doing that.