On Sep 24, 2013, at 8:45 PM, "deadalnix" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Wednesday, 25 September 2013 at 03:12:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >>> On 9/24/2013 5:39 PM, deadalnix wrote: >>> It doesn't seem that surprising to me. If you want a compiler that is fast, >>> you >>> use DMC, if you want a compiler that will do coffee, you use GCC or clang >>> recently. >>> I do think the user base you judge on is biased. >> >> I'm sorry, I don't believe the dmc user base secretly loved that feature. >> Which is why I dropped it from dmd, despite having spent significant time >> making it work nice in dmc. > > That is the exact opposite. People that like feature rich compiler already > use another compiler. People that like minimal tooling and speed uses DMC.
I don't know. I liked DMC specifically because of the nifty features. I used VC++ for the debugging environment. But then I never worked on a Windows project where compile time was a problem. The really big stuff (ie. millions of LOC) has always been on some variant of Unix.
