On 8 April 2017 at 18:48, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > On 4/8/2017 1:36 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: >> >> On 7 April 2017 at 23:49, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce >> <email@example.com> wrote: >>> >>> Note that this also resolves the long-standing legal issue with D's >>> inline >>> assembler being backend licensed, and so not portable to gdc/ldc. >>> >> >> That makes the assumption that license was the reason why it's not >> included. ;-) >> > > Having an inline assembler is a lot less important than it used to be, so > this is not a big issue. David also hinted that ldc wrote a work-alike, so > this was likely an issue for them.
To make sure you have your history correct. GDC wrote the work-alike x86 assembler, and later dual-licensed it to share with LDC. A little while later I dropped it from GDC as it was not really fit for purpose, and rather outside the scope of what I see should be handled at the language level in the compiler.