http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6658
--- Comment #12 from Vladimir Panteleev <[email protected]> 2013-04-02 21:57:32 EEST --- I don't understand the argument. Because... choosing a lower (and simpler) layer of abstraction would mean that less code would need to be reimplemented? As I understand it, every time DMD implements a new expression type (for example, dot multiply), GDC and LDC would need to be updated. However, DMD already has a glue layer that lowers all of the D-specific expressions to something closer to abstract machine code, which I'd think is what alternative backends would be more interested in. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
