ixid, el 30 de March a las 20:04 me escribiste:
> On Sunday, 30 March 2014 at 19:28:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> >On 3/30/2014 10:08 AM, Kagamin wrote:
> >>On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 21:16:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> >>>It could be useful for me just this past week in a throw-away
> >>>D program that I
> >>>wrote (at work! :) ) to parse some C and C++ files very
> >>>crudely.
> >>
> >>As I understand, a preprocessor works on macros only, the rest
> >>is lexed minimally.
> >
> >Yes, it won't help much with the rest.
> Were those ycombinator performance figures putting warp someway
> behind clang valid? Perhaps we should unleash a community effort to
> match clang?

I think that's pretty wasteful, why won't you just use clang? What's the
point of competing with another opensource project (a very good one,
that took a lot of men-hour to do a good C/C++ compiler, including the
preprocessor). I understand Walter did this in a couple of weeks, clang
have been developed for at least 7 years now, is totally understandable
that clang outperforms warp, is enough merit for warp to outperform GCC.
I mean, if someone wants to have fun, go ahead, but putting community
effort on that where there are so many places that are more important to
put the effort on seems a bit silly.

Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
Debemos creer en los sueños del niño. Cuando el niño sueña con tetas, se
        -- Ricardo Vaporeso. Toulouse, 1915.

Reply via email to