On 2011-09-11 06:08, Daniel Murphy wrote:
"Nick Sabalausky"<a@a.a> wrote in message
news:j4gflo$1c59$1...@digitalmars.com...
I'm wondering if maybe the problem is that it needs a different approach.
I suspect a big part of the reason it's stagnated is because it's
difficult to update to new versions of DMD.
I think what's needed is an approach where changes from DMD to DDMD are
minimal. Plus a "staged" approach to maximize DDMD's usefulness while it's
under development. This is what I have in mind:
I actually had some success with a similar approach in the past, converting
parts of the lexer to D (before I got sidetracked fixing dmd bugs). For
this to be viable, D needs to be able to call normal C++ functions, C++
non-virtual member functions (including constructors), and access data
members of C++ classes.
I find this strange:
D can call C++ free functions and virtual member functions but it cannot
call non-virtual or static member functions.
Especially not be able to call static member functions are strange. I
thought that free functions and static member functions where
implemented in the same way. As far as I know they are implemented in
the same way in D.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
