3 ms·

> The people who want to drag D into the Java/C# territory are the problem in my opinion Absolutely and that's the majority of D community. > took what C had

by arunc 4y ago

> The people who want to drag D into the Java/C# territory are the problem in my opinion Absolutely and that's the majority of D community. > took what C had to offer and put it to the next level ImportC is a fantastic stuff that Walter is working on. > simplify the language Sane defaults, but the ship has sailed. Reminds me of a talk Scott Meyers gave a while ago "The last thing D needs (is to hire him)". I think it's time they hire him. > compiler performance Rather focus on just LDC or GDC and drop DMD altogether. DMD is a good piece of software, but for such a small community, I find it alarming that they waste human effort across 3 different compilers and still complain lack of resources.

Kukumber 4y ago
> ImportC is a fantastic stuff that Walter is working on. I agree, it's one of the things that stands out when you decide to pick a system language: "how does it play with C? can i easily consume the ecosystem?" > Rather focus on just LDC or GDC and drop DMD altogether. DMD is a good piece of software, but for such a small community, I find it alarming that they waste human effort across 3 different compilers and still complain lack of resources. I disagree, there is value in having your own backend, DMD compiles so fast, it's a comparative advantage, they should never give that up GDC/LDC are great because that allows D to be highly portable, even if they are slower to compile than DMD Even Zig people decided to maintain their own self hosted backend for that reason, performance and independence They learnt from D, a real language has its own backend, if you don't then you are just LLVM sugar
- anta40 4y ago
  >> GDC/LDC are great because that allows D to be highly portable, even if they are slower to compile than DMD So you'd use DMD for development because it compiles fast, and once debugging/testing/etc are completed, you build the "production release" using LDC/GDC?
  - Imperatorn 4y ago
    Yup, many use that approach
- tristanbvk 4y ago
  LLVM sugar. Agreed indeed. Independence is good. No problem with LLVM, but multiple implementations is healthy. And in any case I'd probably think it makes sense DMD came into existence alongside the idea of D first seeing Walter's experience (and well lack of LLVM back then).

by arunc 4y ago

Kukumber 4y ago

> ImportC is a fantastic stuff that Walter is working on. I agree, it's one of the things that stands out when you decide to pick a system language: "how does it play with C? can i easily consume the ecosystem?" > Rather focus on just LDC or GDC and drop DMD altogether. DMD is a good piece of software, but for such a small community, I find it alarming that they waste human effort across 3 different compilers and still complain lack of resources. I disagree, there is value in having your own backend, DMD compiles so fast, it's a comparative advantage, they should never give that up GDC/LDC are great because that allows D to be highly portable, even if they are slower to compile than DMD Even Zig people decided to maintain their own self hosted backend for that reason, performance and independence They learnt from D, a real language has its own backend, if you don't then you are just LLVM sugar

anta40 4y ago
>> GDC/LDC are great because that allows D to be highly portable, even if they are slower to compile than DMD So you'd use DMD for development because it compiles fast, and once debugging/testing/etc are completed, you build the "production release" using LDC/GDC?
- Imperatorn 4y ago
  Yup, many use that approach
tristanbvk 4y ago
LLVM sugar. Agreed indeed. Independence is good. No problem with LLVM, but multiple implementations is healthy. And in any case I'd probably think it makes sense DMD came into existence alongside the idea of D first seeing Walter's experience (and well lack of LLVM back then).