How can we make it easier to experiment with the compiler?

[rikki cattermole]

On 27/05/2021 7:13 AM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote:
> On Wednesday, 26 May 2021 at 14:21:06 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
>> I actually have an article on code quality and how I measure it.
>>
>> https://cattermole.co.nz/article/code_qual
> 
> 
> I like your motto: Code is documentation!

Thanks!

>> But the important list I use (for which dmd fails completely at):
>>
>> 1. Organized in a way that reflects the idea/concept.
>> 2. Seperate concepts, seperate areas (files/areas of a file).
>> 3. Grouping of resource usage
>> 4. Depth from purpose
>> 5. Naming
>>
>> 1, 2 and 4 is what this part of the thread is all about.
> 
> But, my main issues are not these, these are symptoms. My main concerns 
> are the consequenses of the ubderlying cause for these symptoms. The 
> real challenge is not having a clean way of introducing new components ( 
> like an IR between front and backend or a new solver related to the type 
> system ). There is missing an analysis of where the compiler should 
> allow extensions (compile time) with ease.

Yeah, although I'll stay out of the whole IR thing as I'm no where near 
thinking about something like that.