On 7/28/14, 4:54 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
"Jonathan M Davis" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I would point out that every time I've seen compiler devs discuss
using Phobos in dmd, there has been a large reluctance to do so (if
not outright a desire to avoid it entirely) in order to avoid the
circular dependencies that would ensue (Daniel Murphy in particular
really doesn't seem to like the idea).
Yes, and I'm still against it. It's not about the circular dependency
(that already exists with druntime and is manageable) it's that
including phobos effectively massively increases the size of the dmd
codebase. Phobos is also tied to the release cycles in a different way
than it looks like ddmd will be. Druntime is much smaller and much less
worrying (and impossible to avoid).
There'd also be the argument that using phobos inside ddmd would make
the latter a better test for itself and phobos. -- Andrei
