On Wednesday, 2 September 2015 at 03:31:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, September 01, 2015 09:44:17 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On 9/1/15 6:48 AM, "Luís Marques  <l...@luismarques.eu> wrote:
> On Sunday, 23 August 2015 at 05:17:33 UTC, Walter Bright > wrote:
>> We have made the switch from C++ DMD to D DMD!
>
> Is there a rough prediction of when the use of phobos in > ddmd will start to be accepted?


I'm not a dmd dev, but I'm not sure it will be accepted, since phobos is very unstable. We have to be cautious about making dmd breakable easily by a change to phobos.

Of course, I think there is a baseline dmd/gdc/ldc that must be used to build dmd, so perhaps as long as you use phobos features that work there, it will be OK.

Plenty of Phobos is stable and hasn't changed in quite a while. We do sometimes deprecate stuff still, but there isn't much that gets deprecated at this point, and the deprecation cycle is about two years. The common problem would be regressions, and the compiler gets those as much or more often than Phobos does. But it is true that some stuff in Phobos changes occasionally, and that could affect how new a compiler you need to compile the current dmd.

Regardless of that though, I know that at least some of the dmd developers are against using Phobos simply because they don't want the dependency. It simplifies things if Phobos isn't in the mix. If you have to track down and fix a regression in the compiler, that's easier to do if you don't have to worry about the standard library being in the mix. The less that the compiler depends on, the less that the compiler devs have to worry about affecting the compiler. And if we need anything to be sure of anything working right, it's the compiler. Sure, there are some things in the standard library that might be nice to use in the compiler, but that doesn't mean that it's necessarily worth pulling in Phobos as a dependency, and if it's something that's really useful, maybe it's worth duplicating in the compiler code - or even making a version of it that's tailored to the compiler's needs.

- Jonathan M Davis

LOL.
Using « pure » D in DDMD is ugly. Then why even compiler was converted ? Using phobos in ddmd is helpful - it will help to detect regressions in phobos.
There's an autotester so i don't think it can break the things.
              • Re: ... via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • Re: ... Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d-announce
        • Re: D-Day for DMD... Temtaime via Digitalmars-d-announce
        • Re: D-Day for DMD... Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d-announce
  • Re: D-Day for DMD is today! Jesse Phillips via Digitalmars-d-announce

Reply via email to