On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 11:54:08 +0200 Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote:
> What? I don't see any problem with binary blob. With gcc it is same I > need binary blob to be able to compile gcc from source. And if I am > really scary of binary dmd compiler I can still use last C++ version > and compile it with gcc, then use this product to compile next ddmd > and so on. as i said -- good luck with it. D is not GCC (yet?), and GDC is not a part of GCC. it's very naive to assume that FOSS programmer that wants to try D will take last C++ version, then compiles it, than compiles next D version and so on. he will take either gdc from distro repo (and this will be old, if not ancient) just to find that it has no shiny new features the programmer just read about in NG, or will try to build HEAD and... and drop D, 'cause "if they make it so hard to build their compiler, they can play with it without me". inability to be built with GCC out-of-the-box pushing D into marginality. and inability to use new shiny compiler features 'cause compiler should be buildable with previous versions too. and this will effectively kill language progress: "we will not change this, 'cause it's breaking change and old compilers will not be able to build new ones". lose-lose-lose. being self-hosting is cool, but it will turn D into C++ (by spirit).
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
