On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:50:37 -0400, Don <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
Simen kjaeraas wrote:
Joseph Wakeling <joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> wrote:
Maybe true, but I was thinking of it from a different angle -- why the
main D2 development does not switch backends.
So which do you suggest be used instead - the one that doesn't work on
Windows (no exceptions) or the one that requires Walter to give away
all rights to his work?
Actually, gcc doesn't require Walter to give away all rights to his
work just to use it as a backend (or else the gdc project wouldn't
exist). It would require ceding the rights only if Walter wanted D
to be part of the official gcc distribution.
Jerome
No, the problem is that it potentially makes him give away the rights to
the dmd backend. Which I think he can't legally do, even if he wanted to.
I don't think there is any danger of this, it would be well established
that Walter wrote all his proprietary backend code before he viewed gcc
source. The danger is for future code he writes.
Personally, I am not too concerned about the backend performance, it's not
critical to D at this time. Someone, somewhere, will make this better,
and then any code written in D magically gets faster :) We're talking
about decreasing the constant for the D compiler complexity, not
decreasing the complexity. Code built with dmd runs plenty fast for me
(save the GC performance, maybe we can focus on that first?).
-Steve
