4 ms·
So this would mean we can write D in GCC implementation? But would this increase the user base of D?
by philonoist 8y ago
So this would mean we can write D in GCC implementation? But would this increase the user base of D?
- chrisseaton 8y ago> So this would mean we can write D in GCC implementation? No it doesn't mean that. GCC coding standards require (old, portable) C or C++.
- pjmlp 8y agoNot all standard GCC frontends are written in C++, e.g. GNAT.
- gnulinux 8y agoUhh no, not really, GNU doesn't "require C or C++". First of all GNU coding standard says C is the most recommended language, not C or C++. It even suggests Java before C++ (but I suspect that's a relic of old GNU AoT Java compiler?) and requests people not to use templates (which is hardly what we call C++ nowadays). Other than that, it's 100% ok to write a GNU package in any language people can generally understand and there is a free implementation available, like python, lisp etc. Scheme (via GNU Guile) is even the "official extension language" of GNU and emacs (one of the more popular and older GNU packages) is mostly written in lisp. You must also understand that GNU optimizes for masses to understand the source code, and GNU coding standard was written when C was a very popular language and investing in any other language would just be a gamble. Imagine GNU being written in TCL or Ada... C was and still is a safe choice if you want a good deal of people to understand your code decades later.
- xeeeeeeeeeeenu 8y agoGNU coding standards != GCC coding conventions https://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html https://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html